o, the effect is not what Thatcherism seemed to promise at the outset.
This is a good paragraph because
· There is lots of evidence of work;
· everything in it has a place;
· the terms are defined;
· arguments on different aspects are considered (the welfare state as ideal, or the welfare state as a range of services);
· where material is not covered fully, a reference is given to back up the generalisation;
· all statements of fact are supported by evidence;
· the paragraph comes to a reasoned conclusion.
2. The same paragraph without references
The 'welfare state' can be understood in two main senses: as an ideal, providing welfare as of right to everyone at the best level possible, and as a group of social welfare services developed in different countries. Thatcherism combined the liberalism of the new right with some aspects of traditional conservatism; it argued for a reduction in the commitment to state welfare, coupled with punitive measures towards the poor. If the welfare state is seen as an ideal, then Thatcherism was opposed to it; the Thatcher governments were criticised for the development of unequal provision, privatisation and the 'residualisation' of welfare (especially in housing). If, however, the welfare state is seen as a range of services, the practical impact seems more limited: welfare expenditure was largely maintained and even (in health and social security) increased. The greatest impact seems to have come not from the redu无忧论文 【http://www.uklunwen.com】ction of state welfare, but from the reform of public sector administration and management intended to imitate the workings of the private market. If so, the effect is not what Thatcherism seemed to promise at the outset.
The words are the same, but this paragraph is not nearly as good. It still has
· explanations of most terms;
· arguments on both sides;
· a conclusion.
However, it now lacks
· evidence of work - clearly, some has been done but it is difficult to tell how much;
· material to back up the statements which are made;
The paragraph has assertions without evidence - which cannot be rewarded even if the marker happens to agree.
A similar argument in less detail
Thatcherism combined the liberalism of the new right with some aspects of traditional conservatism (Barry 1987); it argued for a reduction in the commitment to state welfare coupled with punitive measures towards the poor. Thatcherism was opposed to the welfare state; examples were unequal provision, privatisation and the residualisation of welfare (Johnson 1990). However, welfare expenditure was largely maintained and even (in health and social security) increased (Hills 1990), which suggests the government failed.
This is now missing any explanation of what we mean by a 'welfare state', and the conclusion is not really adequately supported by the argument, but it is not bad, because it does put two different opposing views with evidence. It shows, then, selection, ordering |
|
支付方式咨询：357500023@qq.com