What difficulties do you have writing in university classes? How to resolve these difficulties? How will you continue to improve?
Its coming to an end of my second semester and thanks to EG1471 i was able to improve my written english. The difficulties i have writing in university classes is to organise and support my points and of course grammar mistakes will follow as well. As we are all humans and we tend to make mistakes here and there, sometimes more then usual and sometimes very little.
The first difficulty about organising my points and supporting them is that when i start writing my essay, i would be following the outline which i have came up with. But when i am writing, my brain tends to generate and throw new points relating to what i am writing and i start adding it into the current point which i am writing about. It most of the time seems okay with me, but my teacher would say that it makes things complicated, confusing or this is another point which should be by itself.
To resolve this problem of mine, i have been trying to follow strictly to my outline and if more ideas come along, i would note it down separately and will try to see how to add the point into my essay without disturbing the follow and organisation of the essay.
The next difficulty is my grammar, always making mistake by using wrong word, subject verb agreement and sometimes it affects the reader to understand the point i am trying to bring across. And the reader would be left to wonder, what i was trying to say.
This grammar problem of mine has to be solved and can be done so by reading more books, read different type or material as it will expose myself to the different style of writing and how the grammar is being used. The next way is to practice editing text for grammar errors. As there is a saying "Practice makes perfect".
If i carry on reading more books and write essays and edit it myself, i think that would be a way for myself to improve over time.
Last but and the least, i thank you Ms Dara Richard for teaching this module and helping us to improve our English language.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Monday, April 6, 2009
E-portfolio 6 : Identification of 3 common grammar mistakes
English is a language I have been speaking since young so i must be good at it right. Yes, i dont have diffuculty with oral english but my problems is with written english. There is famous saying "old habits die hard", and so it is same for my written english. The 3 most common mistake i have is subject verb agreement, wrong word/word from and punctuation.
The first mistake of mine is subject verb agreement (SVA), the subject and verb should match one another. In short if the subject is single then the verb must also be single, and so subject plural, verb plural.
1a) The drinks is sponsored by Joe. (wrong)
1b) The drinks are sponsored by Joe. (correct).
The next mistake of mine is wrong word(WW)/word from(WF). This mistake happens a bit here and there in my essays.
WF
2a) These two points leads me to say that using algae as bio-fuel will allow more land to be used to harvest crops and lesser carbon emissions, making Earth a clearner place to live.
2b)These two points leads me to say that using algae as bio-fuel will allow more land to be used to harvest crops and less carbon emissions, making Earth a clearner place to live.
WW
3a) Therefore, bio-fuel now is part of the solution to global warming and to meet our increasing demand of power.
3b) Therefore, bio-fuel now is part of the solution to global warming and to meet our increasing demand for power.
The first mistake of mine is subject verb agreement (SVA), the subject and verb should match one another. In short if the subject is single then the verb must also be single, and so subject plural, verb plural.
1a) The drinks is sponsored by Joe. (wrong)
1b) The drinks are sponsored by Joe. (correct).
The next mistake of mine is wrong word(WW)/word from(WF). This mistake happens a bit here and there in my essays.
WF
2a) These two points leads me to say that using algae as bio-fuel will allow more land to be used to harvest crops and lesser carbon emissions, making Earth a clearner place to live.
2b)These two points leads me to say that using algae as bio-fuel will allow more land to be used to harvest crops and less carbon emissions, making Earth a clearner place to live.
WW
3a) Therefore, bio-fuel now is part of the solution to global warming and to meet our increasing demand of power.
3b) Therefore, bio-fuel now is part of the solution to global warming and to meet our increasing demand for power.
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Summary of roundtable discussion
During the roundtable discussion, on the 9th of March, 4 different topic were covered. They were bio-fuel, followed by green chemistry, RFID chips and carbon capture and storage. Since my group discussed bio-fuel, I would be giving a summary on the other 3 topics.
First of all green chemistry is a technology that helps prevent and reduce pollution. The supporting side says green chemistry is a must as it will tackle global warming and green house gas emission problems. This can be done by taking used and unwanted plastic bottles and reducing it into carbon microsphere, which is said to be stronger then diamond. Green chemistry is a technology that ensures that during process and the final production of the product does not not harm the environment in anyway. While on the other hand the opponents argued that green chemistry techonlogy is difficult and very expensive to sustain during this global economic crisis time. They also said that it is not worth for Sigapore to invest due to its limitation like land, cost and the recent economic crisis. Instead of developed countries using green chemistry, they suggested developing countries to use it instead. When i heard that, i was like how can a developing country use green chemistry when it is expensive for developed countries to support it.
The topic was about implantation of micro-chips into every human. This chips would be used as a mean of identification, storage of one's medical history, could be used as a tracking device to locate people lost in natural disaster, to track wanted criminals. However, the opposing side argued that, this micro-chips may seem useful but at the same time dangerous. As hackers could hack their way and steal every individual information. Next is privacy as government or some organisation tracks movement of its own people, and human rights group are against it. There is also the cost of implementing this technology and running it as not every country would be able to afford it.
The last topic was about low-pressure carbon filter process technology. Basically it is carbon capture, as from the name suggest to collect and trap carbon emission will help to reduce carbon emission in the atmosphere and reduce global warming. The supporting side main arguement was to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere by using this low-pressure carbon filter and using the collected carbon emission for enhace oil and methane recovery. The opposing side argued that this technology will provide benefit if it is implemented on a large scale and to have it on a lager scale, cost of implementation will be huge. The long pipes used may leak and so well maintence is need. I personally felt that the against was weak and did not have a proper arguement on why he opposes.
This roundtable discussion help me to understand the other topic for WA2 and also the various technolgies.
First of all green chemistry is a technology that helps prevent and reduce pollution. The supporting side says green chemistry is a must as it will tackle global warming and green house gas emission problems. This can be done by taking used and unwanted plastic bottles and reducing it into carbon microsphere, which is said to be stronger then diamond. Green chemistry is a technology that ensures that during process and the final production of the product does not not harm the environment in anyway. While on the other hand the opponents argued that green chemistry techonlogy is difficult and very expensive to sustain during this global economic crisis time. They also said that it is not worth for Sigapore to invest due to its limitation like land, cost and the recent economic crisis. Instead of developed countries using green chemistry, they suggested developing countries to use it instead. When i heard that, i was like how can a developing country use green chemistry when it is expensive for developed countries to support it.
The topic was about implantation of micro-chips into every human. This chips would be used as a mean of identification, storage of one's medical history, could be used as a tracking device to locate people lost in natural disaster, to track wanted criminals. However, the opposing side argued that, this micro-chips may seem useful but at the same time dangerous. As hackers could hack their way and steal every individual information. Next is privacy as government or some organisation tracks movement of its own people, and human rights group are against it. There is also the cost of implementing this technology and running it as not every country would be able to afford it.
The last topic was about low-pressure carbon filter process technology. Basically it is carbon capture, as from the name suggest to collect and trap carbon emission will help to reduce carbon emission in the atmosphere and reduce global warming. The supporting side main arguement was to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere by using this low-pressure carbon filter and using the collected carbon emission for enhace oil and methane recovery. The opposing side argued that this technology will provide benefit if it is implemented on a large scale and to have it on a lager scale, cost of implementation will be huge. The long pipes used may leak and so well maintence is need. I personally felt that the against was weak and did not have a proper arguement on why he opposes.
This roundtable discussion help me to understand the other topic for WA2 and also the various technolgies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)