William Thomas

   This is a good start on the first writing assignment.  
   You have done a good job, for the most part, on the 
   "they say" part.  

   I have made a number of suggestions for rewording
   or rewriting things directly on a printout of the 
   paper.  Ask me what I meant if the markings are not
   clear.  Most of the changes I am suggesting are
   relatively small things, like avoiding overusing
   the passive voice (e.g. say "the authors add the 
   point that ... " rather than "the point is added 
   that ... ").  Choosing active ways of saying 
   things can really make a difference in the immediacy
   and vividness of how you are presenting your points.
   There are also a couple of places where you could
   be less repetitive and tighten up the ways you 
   say things.  

   Another very small point.  I don't know where
   the expression "X builds off Y " comes from and I know
   people say it, but please don't use it when you write 
   for this class--I'm sorry, but it really bothers me 
   for some reason.  Say "X builds on Y" if you mean that 
   new things are added to a "Y" that was there before.  

   Comment

   1.  This is a good place to illustrate what I 
   mean about rewriting passive voice constructions
   to active voice constructions.  You say 

   "He insists that looking at yield increase and environmental 
   data no clear benefits have been proven to producing
   crops with GMOs."  

   (BTW, if you do it that way, then commas after "that" and 
   "data" really improve readability.)  But *even better* would 
   be something like this:  

   "According to Laskawy, data on yields and environmental 
   effects demonstrates that using GMO crops provides no clear 
   benefits."  

   Note my way makes the "data" the subject and I'm using the
   active verb "demonstrates" rather than the passive "have been
   proven."  (It's considered OK to use "data" as a singular 
   noun these days even though it comes from a plural form in 
   Latin.) 

   PS:  One of the main points of the Laskawy article
   is that increased resistance to pesticides and herbicides 
   is negating the benefits of GMO crops.  The interesting
   point here is that that resistance develops naturally 
   through evolution.  In effect, the genomes of the
   pests and the weeds are changing in response to 
   our genetic modification of the crops.  Some people
   compare the situation to an arms race where neither
   side can ever gain a decisive advantage.