1. Throughout my paper I believe I worked very well with Gee and his concepts. I am able to discuss Gee’s seven building tasks of language throughout my paper and able to connect them to Haas’ and the IMRAD formula. Although I can add more detail into the different sections of my paper and the different science discourses. I will be adding more to my paper on the details of the building tasks, and allowing my paper to flow better and transition between paragraphs
2. I believe I do a good job in paragraph 2 connecting both the building tasks and Haas’ study. I make it possible for the reader to understand the connections going on. My peers also agreed that this paragraph is the best of my essay, and the connections I make was also very easy for my peers to understand. I received great feedback form my peer group on certain things I need to fix throughout my essay and this paragraph to fix minor tweaks here and there.
3. In paragraph 3 I need to do a better job of quote integration and not saying so much of (Haas) or (Gee) when I have already mentioned them in the beginning part of my intro sentence. I am able to get my point across but not to the full potential that it makes it easy for the reader to fully understand. I need to go deeper into my analysis and make better connections and transitions. 
4. My full analysis of scientific discourse is revealed to the reader the full format of the IMRAD and Gee’s seven building tasks. This way a reader can make the most out of their scientific discourse and fully immerse themselves into the field of study. Within Haas’ journals her study of Eliza helps to prove to the reader the full immerse into the science discourse and her gain over the years. 

ENG 110