Agood essay must give clear and precise points. It must clearly speakthe writer(s) mind regarding the matter under discussion. Theauthor(s) need to present the ideas in a coherent manner withinformation backed by data from present or previous research studies.The position of the author(s) is supposed to be felt right from theintroduction of the essay or discussion. Looking at the discussion,ShouldThe City’s CAO Be Required to Live in Halifax as a Condition ofEmployment?,I believe that Group6 presented a good case compared to group 7. To begin with, Group 7`spaper is mainly ethical theories with no references hence showing ustheir paper is highly an opinion piece. A good paper should haveclear discussion backed by facts as opposed to only explainingtheories developed by other scholars (Wyrick,2008).It is important to document assessment of presenting problem inprogress notes prior to beginning any form of discussion. Further,the writer is supposed to show that he or she has an understanding ofthe theory. Group 6 has clear points that show clear arguments on thematter that show their understanding of the discussion. The pointsare backed by facts making the piece a good to read and understand.

Moreover,group 6 gives a background of Butt`s professional career while group7 does not give us more insight. It is important in discussion tooffer introductory remarks that gives general preface of the matterunder discussion. Introduction serves to inform the reader (Wood,2001).It is not wise for the writer to make assumptions that the reader hasinformation about the matters to be discussed. By giving introductoryremarks, the piece done by group 6 sets the pace for other parts inthe essay. It is also an important in an essay that should not bebypassed. Whereas group 6 did not present their ethical theories inthe paper, they break down their argument stronger than group 7. Agood piece should be divided into parts with clear headings. The mainheadings and subheadings are important to enhance the flow of theessay. In the discussion, the headings done by group 6 stronglysupport the argument that he does not need to live in Halifax.

Group6 has the stronger submission in my opinion in general review oftheir essay. The members adhered to the general rules in academic bybacking their facts with references from the sources. Group 7 has noreferences/evidence to support their claims.Since theories were used in a big part of the essay, it was prudentto cite the sources as the theories were not opinions. Regarding thestructure of the paper, group 6 has a better organization of theirwork while group 7 has poorly organized their work. By explainingtheories only, it is not clear what the writer wanted to realize orcommunicate to the reader. Structure helps in making the readerappreciate the points under discussion.Coherence is essential in any essay as it points out that the readerhas ably prepared the points. Group 6 appears to have the morelogical paper. Usage of references and clear points allows the readerto benefit from the information provided. Their discussion has fewermistakes hence making it better compared to the one prepared by group7. Group 7’s submission is one giant opinion piece that does notanswer the question clearly. While they draw on the ethical theories,the analysis of the theories was weak. It is true that group 7 didadequate research but they did not use it appropriately to ascertaintheir position about the matter (Freeman,2011).

Nonetheless,group 6 has appropriately argued their points especially on humanrights. However, I consider that the good arguments do not answer theprimary question or affirm their position on whether thecity’s CAO should be required to live in Halifax as a condition ofemployment. We ought to verify ifforcing someone to move for employment is an infringement on his orher rights. The theories are not adequately used to support theirclaims hence cannot be used to ascertain their content regarding theessay. Both essays are open to criticism but the one done by group 6is likely to generate a positive review. Group 7 will definitely geta negative review in both the content and the structure of theiressay.

Inthe concluding remarks, it is expected that a writer need to restateand highlight the main points in the essay, including the thesisstatement or the position taken by the writer. Comparing the twoessays, the conclusion done by group 7 is extremely weak and does notconvince one that Butts should live in Halifax. Group 6 has elaborateremarks that show that the city’sCAO should not be required to live in Halifax as a Condition ofEmployment. The part is essential as it affirms the position taken bythe writer.


Freeman,J. B. (2011). Argument structure: Representation and theory.Dordrecht: Springer.

Wood,N. V. (2001). Writing argumentative essays. Upper SaddleRiver, N.J: Prentice Hall.

Wyrick,J. (2008). Steps to writing well: With additional readings.Boston, MA: Wadsworth.