Assessment of Essay New innovative treatments for stroke by Suleyman Rasul

Content:
Is this essay addressing the title question? If not: why? and what could be done to
improve? The essay addresses the title in a very informative way and allows the
reader to gain ideas of the different treatments of strokes.
To improve I would say that writer needs to explain some of the technical terms so
the reader does not need to try to work out what the particular word/phrase means.
Does the essay leave you with any questions? If so, what are they?
Are there any more drugs or medical ways of treating strokes as well as tPA.
Is there enough pertinent information? If not, what is missing?
There is a lot of relevant information about innovations in treating strokes and the
essay has covered a lot of aspects of treating stroke, however the Occupational
therapy treatments seem a bit one-sided the writer needs to access some of the draw
backs of these, if there are any. Also the writer has left out haemorrhage as a cause
of stroke.
The writer has not explained the problems associated with stroke and what it does
to the sufferers and so why occupational therapy is needed in rehabilitation.
Is there information in the essay that seems irrelevant to you? If so, what are they?
There doesnt seem to be anything irrelevant
Are there instances where the writer provides too much information and/or too little
explanation? If so, give an example.
The writer has written a lot about the treatments of long-term rehabilitation of
stroke sufferers, but it is understandable as this is important for prevention of
another stroke, but there should be more information about treatments for the
initial problems of a stroke.
Are the ideas well supported with evidence? If not, give an example.
The writer has given many references and backed up all the different treatments
that they were explaining, also presenting the information in a short and precise
way.

Structure:
Introduction

Is there an introduction? (Y/N) Yes

Does it explain the content and the relevance of the issues discussed?
(Y/N) Not Really

Does it set the aims of the essay? (Y/N) Yes

Overall, is the introduction effective? (Y/N) Not really

What could be done to improve it?

The first part of the introduction has some faults as there are too many short
sentences with abrupt stops. The sentences should be linked and be more fluid
when reading it. The first part of the intro that explains why strokes need to be
looked at and their treatment needs to link to the last part of the intro.
Body

Into how many parts is the main body of the essay divided? (NB: the
division might not be explicit).
6
Can you easily discern the meaning and direction of each part? (Y/N)
Yes
Do the parts fit together? (Y/N) Yes
Are the links between the different parts of the essay clear? (Y/N)
Kind of
Overall do you think that the structure makes sense? (Y/N) Yes

What could be done to improve it?

There are some links between the Body, but should be more discrete, so the body of
the text would flow.
Did you feel at any time lost when you read this piece? If so, give an example.
Only at times when I read some of the technical terms and didnt understand them
Conclusion

Is there a conclusion? (Y/N) Yes

Does it summarise the main findings of the essay? (Y/N) Yes
Does it put the subject into perspective? (Y/N) Yes
Overall, is the conclusion effective? (Y/N) Very

What could be done to improve it?

The conclusion does show the writer is thinking further about treatments but it
needs to be a shorter

Style:
Is this essay written in a style that is clear and easy to understand? If not, give an
example. Needs to clarify more on certain things mentioned in Content and
Structure to make it flow and easy to understand
Do you think that the writer has considered the audience? (Y/N) In some respects
Is word choice always clear and precise? If not, give an example. Yes
Is the referencing correct? When not, give an example. Yes
Is the essay carefully proofread? Is it free from errors in grammar, spelling, and
punctuation? Yes
Overall feedback:
What in your opinion is the best part of the essay and why?
The best part of the essay is probably the way the writer had talked about a range of
different treatments in depth. Also the essay is structured well and paragraphs are
generally easy to read and not too long.
What have you learnt from this essay in terms of writing skills (e.g. research,
structure, argument, style, etc.)? The essay shows me that there has been a lot of
research conducted and that the writer has thought quite a lot about treatments for
strokes. The essay is also structured well and needs some improvement overall here.
The pros and cons of the different arguments seem to be conveyed well.
What specific aspects do you think should be changed when this essay is rewritten?
List them as they come to your mind? Now list them in order of importance.
1. Improve the introduction, 2. Explain technical terms, 3. Link parts of the essay to
make it more flowing.
How would you evaluate the essay on a scale of 1-5 (5 being best)? 4
Peer-assessment. Revising/Editing Checklist. Page 4