US President Jimmy Carter, in his speech, expresses his opposition towards an industry development on Arctic Nation Wildlife Refuge. He efficiently uses personal anecdotes, historical evidences and counterarguments to argue that US should preserve the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in its original form.
Mr.President started by telling his personal story in paragraph 2. He demonstrates the prestigious beauty of the land, quote “There was a timeless quality about this great land” in order to offer the audience a clear sight of his context. Through his own experiences, the audience can truly appreciate the precious value of the Arctic Refuge. Therefore it makes it easier for the audience to empathize with the President.
Jimmy Carter’s argument is also furthered by listing historical events that happened to the Arctic Refuge: “In 1960, President Dwight D.Eisenhower established the original 8.9 mil…” These historical events are important factors in determining the Refuge’s tradition value. The President addressed these to remind the audience how deep the government care about the Refuge and how the US Gov tried in order to preserve this Refuge. Reminding people about the Refuge’s value would be a very effective way to carefully show them that US need this refuge and it is important for us to preserve it.
Finally, Jimmy Carter admitted some of the benefits in industrializing the Refuge “At best, the Arctic Refuge might provide 1 to 2 percent of the oil our country consumes each day.” But then he countered that fact by encouraging people to save their daily energy consumption or use economical vehicles “We can easily conserve more than that amount by driving more fuel-efficient vehicles” This will give the reader a clear understanding of the uneconomical industrialization of the Refuge, therefore raising their opposition towards such an act.
By employing personal anecdotes, historical evidences and counterarguments, former US President Jimmy Carter convinces his reader of his claim.
There are both big picture and detail problems with this essay. This is not an exhaustive list, but I hope it helps you get a sense of what is expected.
Big Picture
Length- overall this is much too short, but this is a problem that will be remedied by addressing the other problems.
Reading- One of the scores is the “reading” score. You need to clearly demonstrate that you understood the passage provided. If your references to the provided passage are limited to vague nouns and quotes, you are not showing that you understood the deeper purpose of the passage.
Analysis- It is not enough to randomly grab onto some rhetorical techniques and say the author used them. You should be a exacting as possible about what technique is used and then explain how that technique bolstered the essay effectiveness are a persuasive piece. For example, you claim that Carter uses a personal story/anecdote (which is accurate), but your explanation focuses on descriptive language. You say that the audience will be convinced, but give no evidence how that is to happen.
Writing-The organization of your paragraphs does not provide the most effective presentation. You last body paragraph is presented in a way that weakens Carter’s argument. You want to plan your essay so that your strongest argument is saved for the end where the reader will remember it best. Most of your writing errors center around word choice and consistency, but there is a comma splice in the third paragraph. The Introduction and Conclusion are overly simple and won’t help you score above a 3 out of 4.
Detail Problems
Presidents are referred to as President (Last Name) so throughout this essay it should be President Carter
(Mr. president is used only when speaking directly to the President)
Evidence is an uncountable noun and so it is always singular (You can use "pieces of evidence" if you want to refer to a number of items)
President Carter wants you to be upset over the possible environmental damage, not to empathize with him. He is not personally hurt.
You keep referring to multiple examples of each rhetorical technique (anecdotes, historical events) but your essay only really uses one example of each.
There are limited or choppy transitions.
Literary Present- when writing about a literature, you should use a form of present tense consistently throughout your essay. This is a consistency issue. Most literature (Fiction and Non-Fiction) is written in past tense. By writing you analysis in present tense, you making a clear distinction between the provided essay and your own essay. This si a rule that should always be followed when writing an analysis.
You need to go deeper in your analysis. You’re picking at quotes and then writing very weak and almost disconnected commentary. Your flow is also kind of poor.
This essay would probably score around a 6/5/6.
The best advice you can get is go to your school’s AP Lang teacher and ask for help with the rhetorical analysis essay. If you can write 7-9s on those type of essays you will be scoring in the 7+ range on each category when you transfer your skills over.