A few years ago I had an English teacher that encouraged "The Oreo Method"; it compares effective constructive criticism to an Oreo cookie.
The filling in the middle was the constructive criticism, but before and after that, you offer positive feedback for the writer.
Pretty self explanatory:
1. Provide one piece of positive feedback first and linger on it for a couple sentences; let them know how important that "thing" is and, in a way, praise them for doing it. This primes them to accept your feedback cause they know how thoroughly you've read and analyzed their work.
2. Offer any and all of the constructive criticism you have; stay subtle and be concise with all your feedback.
3. Offer more positive feedback, as many good things as you can come up with.
By submerging the constructive criticism between positive feedback, you keep their hopes up while still thoroughly conveying weak spots in their work.
I hope this kinda made sense; it's a very self explanatory idea so I had trouble elaborating on it.
The passive voice can be effectively used to
The correct option is A. Create an impersonal tone. The important thing is not what or who has done the action. That's why passive voice is so used in newspaper articles.
<span>Hamlet is debating whether or not to kill himself, whether it is nobler to stay, endure the misery, and fulfill his promise to his father to kill Claudius, or to kill himself and end his suffering now.
"To be or not to be, that is the question" (Act 3, Scene 1, Line 64-98).
</span>
