Recently our English teacher gave us a packet filled with techniques to write a good conclusion. I have found two techniques that I am going to use to write two new conclusions. The second conclusion is a broader statement of the paper's implications and the third is an evaluation of the paper's subject. By stating the broader implication of the paper the message of the paper is summed up for the reader. Evaluating the paper's subject makes the message of the paper more meaningful by comparing it to real life experiences and making the reader think. The first conclusion is my original conclusion and following are the new ones I have written.
Yes Saint Mathews truly is the perfect place. A passer-by might think this with the beautiful stone, perfectly manicured gardens, pristine condition and perfect academic record. Beneath the surface Saint Mathew’s doesn’t seem as perfect as it looks though. With quickly shot glares, tiny whispers and even wide spread cheating. Ye Saint Mathew’s truly is the perfect place.
The sins committed at Saint Mathew’s should be nothing new to anyone. Sin is part of human nature and happens on a daily basis. Therefore everyone sins whether it is a little white lie, a glance, a thought or even taking an extra helping of seconds. Sin is everywhere.
Saint Mathew’s may seem like the perfect place, but that is truly impossible. There is no place on the earth that can be perfect. This is because people have reached every part of the world and everywhere people are sin is present. In order for a perfect world free of sin to exist people must be removed from it.
It might help if you include the original conclusion here too so that the reader will have a point of comparision.
ReplyDeleteBe sure to expand that reflection. What do you think about each of them now? Which one do you prefer? Why? Be specific. What did you learn about writing conclusions? This might also help you in your "letter to the reader."
Ms. Basko