Convention Analysis Project, Part 3A:
Analysis of Student Papers-Organization-Audience and Purpose
Student paper 1
I. Organization:
Source: I find this paper from the Department of economics. This is a student paper from
fall 2002. The title of the paper is “The benefits and costs of legalized gaming in
Hawai’i” Because of the confidentiality the department didn’t give me the author’s name
of the paper.
Title: The title of the paper is informative enough. Specially, in Hawaii it is easy to
understand the paper is going to discuss about gambling issue in current economic
condition. The title should be interesting for most readers in current Hawaii.
Sections: The paper is divided in to four sections such as introduction, benefits of
gaming, costs of gaming, analysis and conclusion .The different sections are organized
for different font sizes with bolt and underline. Middle two sections are divided into four
subheadings each. The subheadings differentiated from the text for different font sizes
with bold. The paper doesn’t followed IMRD. The paper followed writing form such as
introduction, discussion, analysis and conclusion.
References: The paper has one page of reference list. The references are not numbered,
which can make some difficulties for readers. The references are listed not by the one
system. The references are listed by article, by author or by source. The paper hasn’t any
footnotes and endnotes.
Citations: The text of the paper included many citations from the different sources. About
30 percent of the paper has a citation form. The author used all kind of citation types:
summary, paraphrase and direct quotations.
Tables and Figures: The author is used many data from different sources. The data are
included in the main text. Often-used expressions for referring the data are: according to,
another study conducted, estimates that, there are a few examples. There are no tables
and figures in the paper.
Similarities: The formatting order for sections of this paper is similar to articles I have
analysed in Par 1 of CAP. Most articles were divided in to sections like as in this paper:
introduction followed by discussion and analysing part, finally conclusion. This paper
and articles both used separate page for reference list.
Differences: While articles analysed in Par 1 of CAP were used many tables, figures,
mathematical equations, footnotes and endnotes, the paper does not used any of them.
Articles were included citations mostly from scientific sources. The paper used for
citation mostly newsletters and periodical handouts.
II. Purpose:
The purpose of this paper is indicated at the end of the introduction part. According to the
author purpose of this paper is to present positive analysis of the benefits and costs of
legalized gaming in Hawaii and it’s influence on economic development of Hawaii.
III. Audience
Because of this paper is due to Economic Department subject, the first audience of the
paper was a professor, who is quite knowledgeable about the topic. However the paper
can be published in the newsletter and average reader will understand content of the
paper. The paper written on the basis of newsletter article sources.
Student paper 2
Organization:
Source: I fund this paper also from the Department of economics. This is a student paper
from fall 2002. The title of the paper is “Deforestation: Who is Responsible and Who
Should Pay”. Because of the confidentiality the department didn’t give me the author’s
name of the paper.
Title: The title of the paper is informative. It isn’t difficult to understand the author is
going to discuss about deforestation and its responsibility. The title used colon: Before
the colon general purpose of paper and after the colon specific interest of the study.
Sections: The paper is divided into eight small sections, beginning from the introduction
finalising for conclusion .The different sections are organized for different font sizes with
bolt and underline. Sections are not divided into subheadings. The paper doesn’t
followed IMRD. The paper followed writing form such as introduction, analysis and
conclusion.
References: The paper has half page of reference list. The references are not numbered,
which can make some difficulties for readers. The references are listed not by the one
system. The references are listed by article, by author or by source. The paper has
included one footnote. But it is difficult to fund where is cited this footnote.
Citations: The text of the paper is included citations from the different sources. About 10
percent of the paper has a citation form. The author used all kind of citation types:
summary, paraphrase and direct quotations.
Tables and Figures: The author rarely used data. The data are included in the main text.
Expressions used for referring the data are: estimates that, for examples. There are no
tables and figures in the paper.
Similarities: The formatting order for sections of this paper is similar to articles I have
analysed in Par 1 of CAP. Most articles were divided in to sections as in this paper:
introduction followed by discussion and analysing part, finally conclusion. This paper
and articles both used separate page for reference list.
Differences: While articles which analysed in Par 1 of CAP were used many tables,
figures, mathematical equations, footnotes and endnotes the paper does not use any of
them.
II. Purpose:
The purpose of this paper is indicated at the end of the introduction part. According to the
author purpose of this paper is to analyse of reason and impact of deforestation, it’s value
and responsibility for forest.
III. Audience
Because this paper is due to Economic Department subject, the first audience of the paper
was a professor, who is quite knowledgeable about the topic. But average educated reader
can understand content of the paper. Author didn’t use scientific approaches and present
findings, but includes major uses of commentary.
.