+1443 776-2705 panelessays@gmail.com

Question Description

Argument Peer Review The title of the essay gives the reader an idea of the topic that is in the essay but not an idea of the stance that the author is taking in the essay. Background information includes how this has been an ongoing possibility and eventuality that humans have been talking about since basic tools were implemented into basic tasks of society. Some other background information is included like how people theorize it could impact other job sectors. It could be improved by adding more specific information about what they mean by technology being implemented into sectors such as manufacturing. “This paper analyzes the extent to which technology has overtaken the labor industry, the future of the human workforce, and the ethnicity behind it all.” This is the thesis from the essay. The writer doesn’t outline the stance specifically in the thesis which would be beneficial for the argument. The main points that are brought up in the thesis are what get brought up in the body paragraphs which are good, but the main improvement that needs to be made in the thesis is a clear claim for the essay. The author analyzes what has already happened in terms of the ongoing question of whether technology is good or bad in industries. The next point is about the future job outlook of people that could lose their jobs and it is about how it is still possible for these people to adapt new skills for the new jobs that they will be working. The ethicacy is probably the strongest point. When workplace safety is brought up and how technology could make the workplace safer the author benefits their side of the argument. Each reason is logically argued, but more information could be added to help make the argument and the picture more clear about the argument. Maybe policies or examples of companies could facilitate the transition of workers from their jobs to working on technology instead of laying off a bunch of workers and hiring different ones. I think the logic is fairly sound in the arguments, but it could be built up to assist in proving the point. In this essay there is no clear rebuttal paragraph with concessions and refutations. Some concessions and refutations exist throughout the essay, but they are few. A way that you could create a rebuttal is by taking the other side’s main point of taking jobs and turn it into the rebuttal and add another point to the essay. Again there doesn’t seem to be a clear rebuttal paragraph that is separate from the main points of the essay, but the main rebuttal that is made in the entirety of the text is in the main point about job loss and gain. Sound logic is used when the essay body talks about how technology and automation will help make the workplace a safer place. The use of the deaths on the job could also help out an emotional appeal, but using it to explain how human error could be prevented with automation and robotics is a good use of logic. There is no area in the essay where logic is weak, just areas where further explanation of the point could benefit the argument such as when the new jobs being created is brought up. The emotions evoked are primarily when the deaths on the job are mentioned and the ethicacy of using automation in the workplace is brought up. When the author mentioned the amount of deaths on the job it built up the emotional appeals because automation and technology is now seen as a way to save lives. Each of the body paragraphs has a topic sentence and evidence to back up the claims. The explanation of the evidence is sufficient, but it could be built stronger if further explanation is included. In terms of the evidence diversity in the sources could help build the argument. The conclusion reminds the reader of the main points brought up in the essay. The conclusion is relatively strong because the author recognizes the other side of the argument and that it could hurt some people, but then reminds the readers of the points that they made in their essay, and the benefits that the specific technologies could have. The author for the most part has appropriate transition words in the essay, but more information and explanation would help add to the argument and also present a greater need for transition words. The essay has the transitions that it needs. The MLA format of this essay looks accurate except for the title. The title could all be on one line but it isn’t. The strongest aspects of this argumentative essay are the inclusion of the logical appeals, and the limited inclusion of emotional appeals. The balance between all the appeals is good, but especially for the topic where you can’t be overly emotional. The weakest part of the argument was that the explanation of the quotes could have been more extensive, the diversity of outside sources could have been stronger, and the lack of a rebuttal.

You have a great topic. However, Im not entirely sure what it is that you are arguing. Also, since your argument is not as clear as it should be, your supporting reasons and rebuttal are also not as easy to identify. You must address these issues for your final draft