12 essay

Test Preparation SAT Preparation
21

<p>This is my 11 essay. Not revised</p>

<p>Assignment:Is it wrong to use the word “courage” to describe behaviors that are ordinary or self-interested? </p>

<hr>

<p>“Towering genius disdains a beaten path, it seeks regions hitherto unexplored.” The words of wisdom from Thomas Paine, a great American revolutionary thinker, clearly justify the paramount importance of breaking the established ways of thinking. In my opinion, breaking these established ways of thinking is a truly courageous behavior so I believe it’s wrong to use the word “courage” to describe behaviors that are ordinary and self-interested. Examples from the realms of politics and economy will justify my point.</p>

<p>At the beginning of American Revolution, most states only favored restricted independence of the states and dismissed the idea of complete independence. More conservative were the loyalists who firmly opposed to all forms of American independence. So courageous was Thomas Paine that under such circumstances he was courageous enough to publish his epoch-making masterpiece Common Sense, which promulgated the ideas of liberalism and republism and called for the complete independence of all American states in an outspoken way. The book was a huge success. It spread as quickly as an epidemic among the literate and 300,000 copies were sold in only three months. His ideas became one of the paramount ideologies of the American Revolution. Thomas Paine’s actions can be classified as “courageous” because he had to face opposition. But his motives are neither ordinary nor self-interested. He was writing for the sake of all the Americans. Therefore, the example of Thomas Paine totally contradicts the claim presented in the assignment.</p>

<p>Not only in the sector of politics but also in the domain in the economy exists courageous innovative genius whose actions are altruistic. Franklin Roosevelt is a legend who, had to face an unprecedented economy crisis just after his inauguration, and who, discovered sagaciously that the crux of all economic problems of that time was the lack of government intevention in the economic activities, and who, was severely censured by conservative economists who firmly believed that only free market should control economy, and who, nonetheless enforced his innovative New Deal and revitalized American economy in only eight years. Franklin Roosevelt is also a courageous person because few people in the 1930s could understand his policy. But unlike those so-called courageous people who are inherently selfish and mediocre, Roosevelt wanted to save America, instead of aggrandizing himself. And at last, he succeeded.</p>

<p>In light of the previous examples, it is clear that the word “courage” should be used for innovative people. Those who strive for their own interests such as navigators searching for a wristwatch, are just ordinary and not courageous.</p>

22

<p>crazybandit, Bram Stroker didn’t write Frankenstein, he wrote Dracula. Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein :D</p>

23

<p>A well-known company recently proposed setting aside every Friday as a day with no e-mail-based communication. On these e-mail-free Fridays, employees would be encouraged to refrain completely from reading or sending e-mail or text messages and advised instead to call each other or talk in person. This idea can work for everyone. If each week we set aside time to actually talk to one another, our communications will be less impersonal and more effective and satisfying.</p>

<p>ASSIGNMENT: Is talking the most effective and satisfying way of communicating with others? Plan and write an essay in which you develop your point of view on this issue. Support your position with reasoning and examples taken from your reading, studies, experience, or observations.</p>

<p>In our society, we depend more and more on texting, emailing, and other forms of communication that don’t require face-to-face contact. It is a pity that for efficiency’s sake, we choose to give up actually talking to each other. In face-to-face conversation, there are nuances such as facial expressions, body language, and touch that can’t be replicated through even today’s most complex webcams. Talking still remains the most important and most personal form of communication.</p>

<p>Our culture has always emphasized face-to-face meetings; but not only does the American culture emphasize this, but almost every culture sees a face-to-face meeting as a genuine sign of respect and trust. During the Cold War, China and the US maintained communication only through phones and letters. Nixon’s visit to China shows how highly we all value talking: what could have never been conveyed over the phone was easily conveyed through a smile. The meeting was historic not in what Mao and Nixon discussed neccessarily but what it represented. Similarly, despite the great advances in technology since the 1970s, diplomats and leaders still choose to visit nations and talk, rather than hide behind emails. How many misunderstandings can arise due to a misplaced comma or spelling mistake that can be easily clarified in person?</p>

<p>In a similar vein, many jobs still require in-person interviews. One can be an effective communicator through email or social networking sites but like in dipkomacy, a lot of takling still takes place. Employers conduct in-person job interviews because not only is face-to-face communication required in a job, it is also important to be a friendly, effective communicator. A great resume cannot compensate for indadeqaate social skills that are exemplified by the skill of conversation.</p>

<p>As part of a generation that takes email and Facebook fro granted, I understand all too well the temptation of avoiding eye contact and potentially avoiding verbal slip-ups. However, I also understand that talking truly bonds people together; trust and respect can be shown in one subtle gesture and mistakes clarified in seconds, followed by a good laugh. All the technology we have cannot and perhaps never will help us form the strong relationships that we prize above all else. </p>

<p>Notes:</p>

<p>Score: 11
My handwriting was…decent. Not amazingly neat, but everything was readable and it wasn’t hard to read.
I literally used every space possible, but I didn’t cram or anything. lucky me.
And rereading this made me want to cry because I said “face-to-face” so often!
Personally I thought the second example with the resume is really weak, but they went along with it, I guess.
I swear, this topic was on the AP Lang test…or something like it.</p>

24

<p>Thanks very much for posting this. FWIW, this is essay was 398 words.</p>

25

<p>

</p>

<p>And no offense to you, but it also reads like a 7th grade essay. I don’t make any judgment on you for two reasons: you scored 1 pt higher than I did and I don’t think that a SAT essay reflects overall potential. What I’m trying to say is that it’s an excellent example (though not necessarily an excellent essay) because it demonstrates how one can achieve a 12 through good structure and a focus on the extreme basics of writing. I think a large percent of the population can follow the way you wrote your essay and improve their scores. </p>

<p>I think there’s an important distinction between what’s expected as a thesis in an AP class and what’s expected here. I attempted to find a golden mean between the two, but obviously one of the graders didn’t fancy my style. Of course maybe someone here will point out that I’m just full of crap, and perhaps not as apt of a writer… but meh, writing is subjective. </p>

<p>

If you’re referring to the one I typed up… yep haha. 2 under the 400 word magical boundary.</p>

26

<p>

Damn. I had gothic literature as a class and all we did was watch movies all year, so I didn’t even realize my mistake. . . . which brings me to my next point: USE MOVIES!!! You remember them better, although not necessarily if you are an avid reader. Also, you can get facts wrong and still score high.</p>

27

<p>

</p>

<p>The SAT isn’t looking for Hemingway here; they’re looking for those that can write and structure thought coherently onto paper. It’s a 25 minute time limit… that’s nowhere near enough to construct a masterpiece. I mean, you can go above and beyond with complex vocabulary and various obscure rhetorical devices (have fun), but it’s not needed on the SAT. And honestly, given a 25 minute time limit, I’m not even gonna try to write a masterpiece. Save that for AP Lang and AP Lit.</p>

<p>One could also argue that any sort of timed essay does not offer a student the opportunity to show off his/her best writing. My best essays have taken me several hours, or even days, to finish and perfect. I’m not gonna try to emulate those essays constrained by a 25 minute time limit, because I know such an essay would probably suck.</p>

<p>Something else: Sounding intellectual (and as a result, pretentious) won’t get you a perfect score on timed writing. Substance makes the essay. Someone could have an amazing control of the English language yet not communicate jack **** in their essays. And substance (as in facts, supporting details, the strength of the links between facts and claims) are not necessarily as subjective as you think.</p>