Grade my essay? Hard essay prompt, but great Intro! Aiming for 12!

Test Preparation SAT Preparation
1

<p>Prompt:
Should heroes be defined as people who say what they think when we ourselves lack the courage to say it?</p>

<p>Essay:</p>

<p>Many people believe that heroes are people who say what they think when we ourselves lack the courage to say it. However, I firmly believe in the opposite. Instead, heroes are defined as people who take action when others don't have the courage to do so. Throughout the extent of mankind, the critical evidence to corroborate my comprehensive outlook is pervasive.</p>

<p>Anybody can muster up the courage to express their true feelings on a matter, but few are willing to take direct action. Mahatma Gandhi was one of these people. Gandhi was a well educated lawyer in the 1900s during the British rule over India. While others simply voiced their opposition to the British, Gandhi decided to actually do something about it. In fact, he gave up his profession to become a freedom fighter for India, engaging in nonviolent practices in hopes of driving the British away. One of Gandhi's most prominent practices was civil disobedience, in which he would not obey the commands of the British. Soon, others, under the influence of Gandhi, also began to practice civil disobedience towards the British. Although Gandhi and his follower's actions led to hard consequences, their efforts ultimately bored fruit. Hence, Gandhi is now considered one of the most prominent founding fathers of India today. Gandhi's clearly demonstrates the idea that people who take action are regarded as heroes, rather than those who merely voice their opinions.</p>

<p>The life of Anuradha Koirala also depicts the notion that people who decide to take action are heroes. Koirala was sold by her father at an extremely young age into India's underworld trafficking system.Fortunately, she was able to escape from her dire situation and now helps others who are currently in the same situation she once was in. Koirala set up a foundation and a shelter to aid girls who escaped the system. To date, Koirala has saved the lives of thousands of girls throughout India, and this achievement earned her the title as a CNN hero in 2009. Rather than merely voicing her opposition to human trafficking, Koirala actually took action to save other girls like her before they are used to satisfy sexual desires or partake in manual labor in rural factories throughout the nation. Thus, Anuradha Koirala is considered a hero because she has made a direct effort to stop illegal human trafficking in India.</p>

<p>After a careful analysis of Mahatma Gandhi and Anuradha Koirala, it is evident that heroes, indeed, are those who take direction action rather than those who merely voice their opinions. The idea that heroes are those who make a direct effort towards a cause ultimately leads to a much more progressive and harmonious society.</p>

<hr>

<p>Upon typing it up, it's apparent there are a few mistakes, but hey, you can have a few mistakes here and there for a 12, can't you? I generally get 1-3 questions wrong on Writing MC, so a 12 essay would really help me get that 800. Please let me know your opinions and what I would probably get for this essay. It took me a while to come up with examples as the topic is unusual, for me atleast.</p>

2

<p>You say “Throughout the extent of mankind,” but only list 2 examples (albeit detailed) from the same country.
There is no addressing of the opposing view apart from your introduction and conclusion. You offer little acknowledgement of the other side.
There are extensive descriptions of the people you list, but you may want to build up your stance with the examples rather than continue to expound upon your characters.
Then again, take my advice with a grain of salt - I’m not that good of an essay writer.</p>

3

<p>Got it, thanks. Throughout the extent of mankind to signify that it’s history. Do people with 12 essays include counterarguments? If so, where? </p>

<p>Normally, I use "Throughout the extent of mankind, extraordinary works of insightful literature, and my own personal experiences, …) to sign history, lit, and personal experience.</p>

<p>Can anybody else provide some insight into my essay? What score does it deserve?</p>

4

<p>I’d give this essay a 10/12. The writing and examples you used are great, but the analysis is quite lacking and at times, repetitive. Really hammer in how your examples relate to and prove your thesis, which you could also expand upon to be more specific (two examples don’t cover the extent of mankind, do they?).</p>

<p>That being said, SAT graders are known to be extremely forgiving on the essay, so I bet you would probably get a 11 or 12 on this were you to submit this. But better safe than sorry.</p>

5

<p>Awesome, I’ll take the 11 :D</p>

6

<p>Clearly a well-written essay, and you’ve gotten some good comments on it already. I will add one more that emerges from the following lines from your essay:</p>

<p>“Many people believe that heroes are people who say what they think when we ourselves lack the courage to say it. However, I firmly believe in the opposite. Instead, heroes are defined as people who take action when others don’t have the courage to do so.”</p>

<p>The first line says that the prompt and your thesis are opposite ideas. They really aren’t, nor do they need to be in order for you to argue your point. Consider that speaking out IS taking an action. It is the act of objecting or criticizing. Further, you could have written something on the order of , ‘I agree with speaking out and would go further to say…’ My point here is that a total rejection of one idea in order to embrace another doesn’t show much sensitivity to the complexity and nuance that can be involved in issues like this. Total rejection seems extreme and unnecessary. It suggests that the writer is hasty and one-sided in his judgment.</p>

<p>“Throughout the extent of mankind, the critical evidence to corroborate my comprehensive outlook is pervasive.”</p>

<p>Your second line has already provoked comment. You evoke the entire history of all of mankind as the scope of your thesis and write of ‘critical evidence’, your ‘comprehensive outlook’ and suggest that through it all the merit of your argument is ‘pervasive’. The point here is that to suggest you are overstating your point would be an understatement. Actually, I agree with the essence of your comment, but again, the way you have stated it is extreme. I believe you were striving to impress the reader with the level of your diction and the force of your conviction, but the reality is that such extreme statements suggest that the writer is either young or egotistical.</p>

<p>“Anybody can muster up the courage to express their true feelings on a matter, …”</p>

<p>Your third line, read by itself, sounds superficial and dismissive of the courage required to ‘speak truth to power’, as is often said. Was it so easy to express dissent in Hitler’s Germany? Was it easy to criticize Stalin? People paid with their lives and the lives of their family for doing so. I think you wrote this line as part of the reasoning that suggested that you had to reject the idea of the prompt in order to advance your own.</p>

<p>I repeat that point because it answers the question you asked in a following post:</p>

<p>“Do people with 12 essays include counterarguments? If so, where?”</p>

<p>The answer is a definite ‘yes’, they very often do. Essays that score 12’s MUST show above average insight into the issues raised by the prompt. That includes acknowledgment that there are at least 2 sides and some indication that the writer is aware of both. That is why an absolute rejection of one idea in order to support the other is seldom a good move. Consider these possibilities:</p>

<p>Those who support X often claim… However, I disagree because…</p>

<p>Those who support X often claim… Of course, there is truth in what they say, but I consider Y to be the more important and immediate consideration.</p>

<p>Those who support X often claim…But I think X is not really relevant to this case because…</p>

<p>As far as how to include contrary considerations, there are two basic ways to do so</p>

<p>First,
The issue is this.
People who believe X argue that x1, x2, and x3.
However I believe Y because y1, y2, and y3.
In conclusion…</p>

<p>Or,
This prompt suggests three issues.
Issue one is…X believes this…Y believes this…
Issue two is…X believes this…Y believes this…
Issue three is…X believes this…Y believes this…
In conclusion… </p>

<p>Of course all of the statements in either pattern can be developed by facts, reasons or examples to whatever extent your knowledge and the 25 minutes you have to write will allow.</p>