Essay写作要注意的几个要点？

一般在英国留学写作业(Assignment)通常分为两种形式，一种是文章(Essay)，一种是报告(Report)。二者在形式上有所区别，但大体相同。Essay的结构—般只包括三部分，即绪论(Introduction)、主体(Main Body)、结论(Conclusion)，写作相对Report而言要简单一些。然而即使如此，很多人花费许多时间准备Essay，却还是因为各式各样的错误问题，最终成绩并不尽如人意。针对这一现状，下面我们就来和大家分享一些在写Essay时的一些要点以及注意事项，希望能够帮助同学们在Essay写作时能事半功倍、顺利完成目标。（当然，如果在写作上实在无法解决攻克需要写作定制，我们的专业团队经验丰富成功案例颇多，也不妨可以联系我们。）

尽量不要直接Copy其他文本
用其他大学的Essay直接复制成自己的文书，看起来是件很轻松的事情，但请千万不要模仿照做——如果想以这种”捷径”来写Essay，轻则会因为没有根据学校的题目要求而跑题，重则可能写错学校的名字而直接不受导师认可。不少学校最近几年改变策略，频频更新文书题目，就是为了防止该类情形发生。
 
Essay题目要早点定下来
很多同学essay写不好其实都是因为纠结在essay的题目上，一直想题目，一直换题目，最后换来换去，素材找了一堆，时间不够了，临时把素材堆到一起，最后赶出来的Essay可能自己都看不明白。
发挥超前意识，早点想题目，果断定下来之后就开始定essay的draft，写好后跟导师、同学聊聊，方向定好后有目的性得去积累素材。
 
规避冗长的观点句
过长表达的观点句，容易造成很不好的阅读感观：一、 读者很难抓住你的重点（要理解这句话，你至少要读2-3遍）；二、 压缩了展开讨论需要用到的字数（要么整段话过长，要么讨论不完整）；三、 写得越长，犯错的概率越大（单词，语法包括标点等）。因此，对于观点句的表达上，应该力求言简意赅、并只表达一个观点。
 


避免用词不当
用词不当也是严重影响Essay阅读体验的要因之一。避免堆砌专业术语和晦涩难解的缩写，文章措辞也应该偏向朴实易懂，导师短时间内要面对成数以千计的Essay，阅读一篇的时间很有限，因此你的Essay势必要容易消化。认为导师会通晓所有行业细节和专业术语，是个错误的观念。
 
灵活运用逻辑过渡词
这些将有助于你的读者弄懂你的写作逻辑。在运用某一个过渡词之前，确保它要和文章所表达的逻辑相匹配。举例来说，表达因果关系时，Because这种词就太基础了，可以试试caused by、result in、due to等。还有一种简单且地道的表达方式就是用suggest，字义上讲是建议，但是实际应用中可以表达告知、通知和结果等各种含义，而且态度谦虚、严谨。最适合学术论文。
 
论点论据必须精确
例如，你想说wikipedia is a large-scale information sharing website, 不能单单止于此，为了使文字precise，你得说明为什么wikipedia 就是 large-scale的，所以应该这样表达：wikipedia is a large-scale information sharing website,because it attracts 78 million visitors per month and has more than 91000 active contributors（Tillotsen, 2010）。
 
注意Deadline
在essay写作过程中还要注意定好时间表，注意deadline，排出一些时间给自己做proofreading。。比较理想的状态是，从收集材料开始，预计好每天的进度，只要完成好当天的任务，这样就简单多了，切莫把所有事情都积攒到最后一天。
 

Essay经典范文参考 FES ESSAY DF-----ANDY

Nowadays, society is developing very fast. The mind of people have changed. Therefore, there is a condition that some people discuss a title that should the UK monarchy be abolished. The people choose whether to keep the constitutional monarchy or abolish it. At the present, constitutional monarchy is the kind of political institution in the world. However, this institution does not have political power. He appointed prime minister and the prime minister, the government management. There are some countries implement the constitutional monarchy, such as Japan, Netherlands. This tradition has continued over 300 years.

On the one hand, because of the right of succession, some constitutional specialist thinks the constitutional monarchy might be able to put the role of the monarch at risk. Because the constitutional monarchy might be change an Act of Congress.

To continue, the Queen does not have the real executive power. She cannot interfere any proposed law which is legislated by the Prime Minister or Parliament. Therefore, some people think the British does not need the Queen because she does not have real power, then, the Queen has no influence over foreign policy decisions. Sometimes, the Prime Minister goes to the Buckingham Palace to visit the Queen and ask the Queen to dissolve parliament. However, Queen can not make any decision.  In someone’s opinions, they think the Queen just like a political puppet.
In the third place, the opponents believe the TAX is another important point to be evidence. There is a data show that the royal family is supported £75,000,000 by taxpayer. They think if these taxes should be used to provide education and social infrastructure. At the same time, the British economic situation is still grim. A lot of people hard work and they do not have obligation to maintain the life of luxury that the royal family live in.

What’s more, the objectors think that constitutional monarchy and democratic is inconsistent. There are hereditary system and class of nobility. That violates the truth and essence of democratic. And world needs democratic. Because of these, they think constitutional monarchy should be abolished in this society.

There is another point; they think the monarch is not a glorious past. Because in the past, the British was a colonial power. Britain used to rule other countries in subordinate ways. Integration and therefore morale in Britain would be much improved with the abolition of the monarchy.
 
On the other hand, lots of people support the constitutional monarchy at the present; they think constitutional monarchy is a symbol of national unity. In addition, constitutional monarchy can preserve the British Commonwealth’s stability. Firstly, as the head of state, the constitutional monarchy symbolizes the UK Political system of the historical continuity. The presence of the King means the continuation of country and political stability. Then because of their unique identity and mental strength, they can keep the security of society and improve the social order. However they do not have political power.
In addition to this reason, there are some other reasons can support this view.
In the first place, in 2007, about 80% of the people said that they support constitutional monarchy, and they want to keep this institution. It symbols the national pride. For example, there is Queen’s head on the pound.

Secondly and equal importantly is that there are some one think that constitutional monarchy do not have real power. That means that it is not important in the country's political development. Therefore, the constitutional monarchy should be abolished. However, the importance of the British royal family by a state visits. If there is no Queen, what would replace the Queen?
 
Thirdly, the tax is another discussion; it is worth rising, even if the constitutional monarchy is abolished, there might be a new element similar, such as prime minister. His expenditure is paid from taxpayer as well.

On the other hand, we can not only see the physical presentation. Because of this, we should not just be opposed to constitutional monarchy from merely financial argument. We should realize its deeper value.From: http://www.ukassignment.org/dxygessay/

After that, Democracy is as well as a significant point. Some people think the constitutional monarchy violate the democracy. In fact, the highest position in reality is Prime Minister rather than Queen or King. The constitutional monarchy is not interfere the democracy. So the democracy is not a problem which we should consider.

Then, supporters think it is a tale of a tub that someone said constitutional monarchy is a Childish game. They believe this opinion belittle the political history. Simply put until the acceptance of democracy, and more particularly modern communications allowing democracy monarchy was probably the best system for a large state to have. And some people think the USA is stronger than UK because of government mechanism. However, the supporters cannot identify with this standpoint. They think these systems are different, they are not be compared.

What is more, it can make a lot of revenue by tourist industry. In fact, the royal family’s palaces have become a great tourist industry. Nowadays, Every year, a lot of tourist visits these palaces from around the world. Lots of people come to Buckingham Palace to watch the changing of the guards and to watch the Queen and Buckingham Palace. That make the British government got a lot of fiscal revenue.

In my opinion, if the constitutional monarchy is abolished, it would ruin a great tradition. That is a massive loss for all over the world. At the same time, constitutional monarchy is part of the national identity.

And the British pays a lot of attention to the traditional and etiquette. At the same time, the constitutional monarchy has the continuity. This feature can keep the government’s stability. Another benefit is political neutrality; there are benefits from keeping the head of state out of party politics- the crown is above the temporary squabble of the political parties. Thirdly and equal importantly is experience. In general, the King or the Queen has a valuable perspective and deeper acknowledge than the temporary Prime Minister. Because they have more experience. Last but not least, the royal family devotes oneself to the charity. At the same time, the queen got the respect and affection from a lot of other countries. Therefore, I think the constitutional monarchy should not be abolished.