This is a preview of the whole essay
Peer Reviews
Here's what a star student thought of this essay
Quality of writing
The report is very simply written, but the spelling and grammar is generally correct throughout. They could have presented the article as if it was in a newspaper, added images and diagrams, and used more complex vocabulary. The article feels occasionally disjointed, like a list of achievements rather than a discussion of his life and the importance of his work. It would also have been a good idea to use a wider variety of sources, which would also have enabled them to gather more information on specific achievements.
Level of analysis
The author has not analysed Galileo's achievements in much depth - perhaps they could have discussed how relevant they are to modern-day life, or how controversial at the time given the religious society of the day. However, they have discussed an instance where he was wrong and mentioned the correct theory ( by Keplar). It would have been better to focus on one or two key achievements and discuss them in more depth, with reference to the social context, knowledge of scientists at the time, and how it shows the importance of his work (by analysing the affects on society and modern physics).
Response to question
The author has produced a short, interesting article about Galileo and his achievements, as required for the question. There is very little scientific content (but the article is meant to be aimed at a non-scientific audience, so this is acceptable), and at times it feels like a list of achievements with some interesting anecdotes. This may appeal to the target audience but may not be good enough for science coursework.