I believe that many candidates, writers and media industry practitioners are not very proficient in word count control.
For some people, they are often annoyed by not having enough words.
In order to make up the word count, it is common to write a lot of useless nonsense and add all kinds of disgusting modifiers.
For other people, there will also be the problem of not being able to control the number of words.
Their ideas are huge and complex, and they always keep writing as soon as they put pen to paper, and then halfway through writing they realize that they have reached the end of their word count before they have even expanded their arguments.
How to solve this phenomenon?
It's simple, layered.
When writing articles, do a good job of macro and meso level control in advance.
The macro is your general thesis, and the meso, which is your sub-thesis.
Do a good job of controlling these two parts, allocate the number of words according to the number of your sub-arguments, and determine how many words to write for each sub-argument.
This is where the problem arises.
How do you find your sub-thesis?
Split the body, which is the easiest.
Businesses, individuals, institutions, etc., so that you already have a sub-argument to start with.
In addition to the main body, you can also start with the materials given, which of course is for the exam.
Some people say that there is no exam, so what do you start with?
The first is to train critical thinking ability, and the second is to participate in social practice.
There are two best ways to train critical thinking.
Reading the news and reading the newspaper, the commonly used sub-arguments are very classic.
Watching the debate competition, there are a lot of debates at station b**, it's really not good to look at the comment area, you can also learn a lot, comment a lot, and naturally someone will teach you in person.
Participate in social practice, read books and work.
Reading books is highly recommended high school politics books, the points are extremely clear, just memorize them.
High School History and High School Geography can be used as supplemental materials.
Work is work, and you can also gain a lot of things that are not mentioned in books and in the news.
Why not say it, because books and news need traffic, and talking about those useful things is not as much traffic as talking nonsense.
Once you've found the sub-arguments, it's time to make trade-offs.
It is best to control the sub-arguments that are comfortable to watch within five, and of course three are the most classic.
Three times people will think that they often read it, five people will think it is professional, and six or more people will be too tired to read it even if they think you have a point.
Once you've determined the number of words for each sub-argument, it's time to assign them.
Generally speaking, arguments are divided into explanations, examples, or reasoning to reach conclusions.
Examples are usually used for long essays, because it is usually enough to analyze one example and write several articles.
Therefore, if the space is limited, either use reasoning or give examples.
But what if you don't have a suitable example and your reasoning doesn't count enough words?
Later, let's talk about how to achieve your sub-thesis, that is, measures.
Of course, some people feel that the word count is not enough.
At this time, there is another trick, what I just said is macro and meso, since I still want to expand the space, then write about the micro.
Micro is the thing that best reflects the depth of an article.
But even then, it is not advisable to conduct a micro-analysis for each sub-thesis.
Micro analysis is best controlled within two, of course, one is the best.
If each sub-argument is micro-dimensional, or if every sub-argument within a sub-argument expands the argument, then the article will become very bloated.
This also involves the issue of focus, that is, the structure of the article is divided into neat and staggered forms.
Official media usually need to be neat, and the logic and word count of each part of the argument are about the same.
Some of them are staggered, with a long and two short reasonably distributed, which not only shows the depth of the highlights, but also completeness.
This is the same as the point of highlight and dark side in art.
Let's start with the definition of microscopic.
Micro is actually a further in-depth analysis of the examples in the examples on the basis of the meso, or a demonstration of the sub-arguments of the Madhyamaka sub-arguments.
Therefore, we can understand a concept, in fact, the micro is dependent on the existence of the meso, and if there is no meso, in fact, the micro can also be the meso.
When there are macro, meso, and micro levels in an in-depth article, if you take out the meso and micro, it can actually constitute an ordinary macro-meso-meso article.
So the depth is comparative, and it is reflected according to the stratification of the article.
Two floors are ordinary, and three floors are considered to have depth.
If you want to make an article in-depth, you can not only add micro, but also add macrocosm on the basis of macro and meso.
But doing so will lead to a digression, or a change in the topic.
As a result, you can adjust your meso and micro lengths according to the word count requirements.
In this way, you can control the word count well.