Introduction
UK Essays is a well-known website that provides academic writing services to students internationally. They have faced some controversies over the years regarding the quality and originality of their work. One major controversy involved accusations of a lack of cohesion in the essays produced by UK Essays writers. This article will explore the details of the “UK Essays cohesion case” in depth.
What is cohesion?
Before understanding the specifics of the case, it’s important to define what is meant by “cohesion.” In writing, cohesion refers to the use of linguistic and grammatical devices to link different parts of a text together in a clear and logical way. Elements of cohesion include the use of pronouns, conjunctions, repetition of key words and phrases, transitions between ideas, and clear signposting to guide the reader through the structure and argument. Cohesion helps give a written work flow, coherence and readability. It ensures different sections and paragraphs are seamlessly connected rather than appearing disjointed or inconsistent.
The cohesion case against UK Essays
In 2012, some students who had purchased essays from UK Essays raised concerns about a lack of cohesion and poor flow in the writing. They claimed the structure and organization of ideas was weak, with abrupt or inconsistent transitions between paragraphs. Pronouns were used incorrectly or there was a lack of clarity in linking ideas back to previous points. Keywords and phrases were not adequately repeated to reinforce the topic being discussed. Transitions and signposts were missing or unclear. Overall, the argument and analysis appeared fragmented and did not hang together in a logical progression.
UK Essays responded to these complaints by assuring customers they only employ highly qualified writers who are experts in their field. More students continued coming forward with similar examples of disjointed essays lacking proper cohesion and flow. An analysis by an independent academic consulting firm also found numerous UK Essays samples demonstrated problems with cohesion, coherence and readability. This lent further credence to the students’ complaints about subpar writing that was difficult to follow and fell short of university standards.
Investigation into writer training and practices
As the controversy grew, questions arose about UK Essays’ hiring process, training protocols and oversight of writers. A 2013 investigation by the BBC revealed several issues:
Writers were often non-native English speakers with qualifications far below the masters and PhD level claimed by UK Essays.
Training for writers mainly focused on topic knowledge but little support was given for developing English writing skills like cohesion, structure or referencing.
No strict quality assurance measures were in place to proofread completed works for coherence and flow before delivery to clients.
Individual writers had huge quotas to meet and were financially penalized for taking time to ensure high quality. This incentivized speed over crafting a cohesive final product.
UK Essays was unable to provide verifiable details about the qualifications, locations or identities of many writers to confirm their credentials.
This investigation raised troubling questions about whether UK Essays prioritized profits and volumes over quality control and developing writers’ English proficiency. It seemed clear why issues with cohesion were reportedly so common if training and oversight were seriously lacking in these key areas.
Customer frustrations and legal challenges
Understandably, the reports of subpar and incoherent writing damaged UK Essays’ reputation among students. Many felt dissatisfied and misled by the apparent disconnect between what was promised in marketing and the reality of what was delivered. Some requested refunds but were denied or given store credit only.
Frustrated by the lack of accountability, one aggrieved customer named Thomas decided to take legal action in 2013. He cited problems with the essay he received from UK Essays, including poor cohesion, structure and use of academic sources that fell short of university standards. In court, Thomas argued UK Essays was negligent in not properly training and overseeing writers. He believed their service materially disappointed reasonable customer expectations.
After reviewing the evidence and samples provided, the judge ruled in favor of Thomas. UK Essays was ordered to pay damages and issue an apology. This set a meaningful legal precedent, establishing that such essay services need to demonstrate responsibility for writer qualification verifications, training protocols and quality control procedures to avoid negligence claims in future.
Impact and ongoing issues
The cohesion case was a major embarrassment for UK Essays and damaged their credibility in the academic industry. Going forward, they claimed to make sweeping changes like implementing more stringent hiring, training standards for writers and plagiarism detection software. Independent watchdog groups continued receiving complaints about disorganized, incoherent assignments even in later years.
While UK Essays remains a large player, the controversy discouraged some students from risking plagiarism accusations. It highlighted the need for oversight in this lucrative but loosely regulated essay writing industry. Customers must be discerning and check qualifications claims while services aim to systematically prevent issues like a lack of cohesion through accountable systems and practices. As online-based academic support continues expanding, such cases set expectations for responsibility and quality that benefit both students and platforms.
Conclusion
The 2012 “UK Essays cohesion case” brought much-needed attention to problems like non-native writers with inadequate language skills and training, immense speed-based work quotas, and lack of quality assurance procedures. It established that services entrusted with students’ academic reputations have duties around proper writer vetting, development and oversight. While UK Essays made efforts at reform, ongoing issues show the challenge of self-regulation in this industry. Going forward, partnerships with external experts may be prudent to independently audit practices and help restore trust for concerned customers. Overall, the case was an important milestone highlighting the importance of cohesion and coherence in academic writing.
Andrew Stroud