- Look at the topic sentence. Is it a complete sentence? Make sure that it's not a fragment or written like a "title." For example, "Steps for staying safe while grocery shopping." This would be a fragment. Instead, write: "There are four steps I take to stay safe from COVID-19 while grocery shopping." This would be a complete sentence.
- Look for the first step. Could you find it easily? Is there a transition? What is the transition? ________
Are there specific details that describe this step? Ask yourself whether a reader could follow along without having to ask follow-up questions. - Now look for the second step. What is the transition? _____ If it's missing, write one in.
Are there specific details for this step? Is there enough detail? If no, suggest what could be added to make it "A-level specific." - Find the third step. Transition? ___
Remember, specific writing is interesting writing! Details like a person's name can help your reader connect with your writing. Are there enough interesting details? - Find the fourth step. Transition?
How many steps are there? There should be at least four, but no more than six. - Is there a conclusion sentence?
- Finally, edit your paragraph the best you can for any errors such as fragments, run-ons, or misspelt words.
Email me if you have any questions.
COVID-19 Safety Paragraph
Sample Solution
On the other side of the aisle, there are a handful of disadvantages associated with the relationship of open-list PR. In traditional PR, party leaders would have the power to allocate seats to their parties candidates as they deem appropriate, taking away political influence from citizens. Candidates in both systems have incentives to garner political party support as it allocates more party power within the upper and lower chambers of the legislature. However, since candidates have more personal power in making a name for themselves without necessarily following party principles, this can lead to a weakening of political parties. Lack of faith in political parties leads to what is known as floor crossing, political figures would change party affiliation, “in an attempt to jockey for the best positions for future elections,” (Dickovick/Eastwood, 409). Only causing faith in open-list PR to further disintegrate, political leaders would offer bribes to legislators to maintain a majority vote on specific pieces of legislation. Also, due to legislators loyalty to their federal states, they do not always have Brazil’s interests in mind when enacting legislation, as only the members of their respective state ensure re-election. What’s more, Brazil contains a multi-party, fragmented party, system where “voters may face as many as one thousand candidates in a single district… [caused by] high-magnitude legislative districts, low costs for candidates’ entry, and high thresholds for the number of candidates per party list,” (Aguilar/Barone/Cunow/Desposato, 181). Withal, the disadvantages of open-list PR in Brazil have led citizens to lose trust in their government, such as the impeachment of Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff in August 2016.
Altogether, the interesting question arises of how an open-list PR system would affect a less fragmented, strong party alliance system in a democracy such as the United States. The transition from a strict first-past-the-post system, which has been the building blocks for American society for 250 years, would certainly cause an uproar from conservatives and libertarians alike. While it would have little to no effect on the Senate retaining two seats per state, the institution of voting proportionment would likely result in smaller parties becoming more prevalent in the House of Representatives. Potential effects of such an institutional