Re: New version (revised) -- Work Group One

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2] ]

Subject: Re: New version (revised)

Author:
Mauricio Horto

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 11:30:55 08/22/10 Sun
In reply to: Luciano Valadares 's message, "New version (revised)" on 14:25:40 08/21/10 Sat

As much read as much changed � other suggestions for a small improvement of the answer with a valuable help from Luciana Maia.

After having read and analysed the articles chosen, we feel that the article writers surely provide the readers with justification for their work. From the very beginning, we can notice on the abstract presented in both works, that they immediately foretell what the research intends to discuss. The abstract serves then to introduce the main idea of the work, giving the most important facts in order to justify their study, as we can see on the lines below .

In the introduction, the authors start to develop their justification by presenting the problem, followed by the official statements and previous researches announcements which were published concerning the case in study. This is done after the author has presented a vast theoretical argument based on previous research made by many experts on the subject analysed. After that, the authors claim the need of such a study since there is a substantial lack of publishing on this subject, which makes his/her work relevant, valuable and original.

After having presented the arguments and spoken about the theoretical literature in which the researches are supported, the authors start to develop the work explaining its purpose, as seen:

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]