Chapter 14

Sampling a Series of Writing Prompts

IN THIS CHAPTER

check Getting familiar with AWA prompts

check Preparing timed prompt responses

check Evaluating sample essays

We know you’re itching to create your own essay responses to some sample AWA prompts. In this chapter, you wait no longer. Here’s your chance to create your evaluations of sample arguments. For each of the following four sample prompts, follow this plan:

Open your word processing programs so that you can duplicate the AWA’s online format.
Set a timer for 30 minutes.
Read the sample prompt.
Evaluate the argument and create a quick outline.
Based on your outline, write a well-organized essay within the 30-minute time limit.
Read the sample essay and dissection that follow each prompt to help you assess your creation.

Sample Prompt #1

The following argument appeared in a plea from a politician:

“The U.S. Constitution has expressed the laws of the land for more than 225 years, and its tenets are meant to help Americans live harmoniously in the company of one another. To date, 27 amendments have been made to it to adapt it for modern life. There are two methods under which changes can be made to the Constitution, and one of them, known as an Article V convention, has never taken place. Given the current divisive political climate, however, it has never been more necessary. An Article V convention would gather states together to discuss and debate newly proposed amendments, and the states would then vote as to whether to make the proposed changes to the Constitution. The very fact that information about Article V appears in the original Constitution implies that its framers knew broad changes would, one day, be necessary. Furthermore, 38 out of 50 states would have to approve any amendments before their passage, so any changes would truly express the wishes of the American people.”
Examine this argument and present your judgment on how well reasoned it is. In your discussion, analyze the author’s position and how well the author uses evidence to support the argument. For example, you may question the author’s underlying assumptions or consider alternative explanations that may weaken the conclusion. You can also provide additional support for or arguments against the author’s position, describe how stating the argument differently may make it more reasonable, and discuss what provisions may better equip you to evaluate its thesis.

Sample response to essay #1

The author of the prompt is trying to argue that Americans should move forward with an Article V convention in order to make the contents of the U.S. Constitution more appropriate and relevant for modern society. For the most part, the prompt does a good job of making the case for the convention.
The author makes some strong points, such as when he or she notes that the Constitution has already been changed 27 times. This statement makes it seem as if changing the document is not a major deal, which might encourage more people to think in the same manner. Another strong point made in the prompt is that the very existence of Article V in the original Constitution intimates that its original creators looked ahead and foresaw necessary change on the eventual horizon.
There are, however, some areas where the prompt could have explained its arguments more clearly or eloquently. One example of this is when the prompt author refers to the “current divisive political climate,” but fails to explain the statement further. What makes the current political climate divisive? Would amending the Constitution put an end to said divisiveness? The author should have provided answers to these questions.
Additionally, the prompt might have benefited from more attention to possible arguments against calling a convention to amend the constitution. It sounds as if this is what he or she is starting to do near the end, where it is noted that 38 out of 50 states would have to voice their approval before any changes could be made, but more depth and additional attention to counterarguments might have strengthened the argument for the convention in the first place.
Furthermore, the author references “two methods” through which the Constitution could be amended, but then only discusses the Article V convention. This begs the questions: What is the other method? and Why isn’t that one being considered as a means of adapting the Constitution for modern-day relevancy? The argument would be more convincing if it provided answers to these questions and the others mentioned above.

Dissection of essay #1

In reading the essay response to the prompt, it becomes clear that the author gave the initial argument thoughtful consideration, and he was able to articulate his thoughts about the argument in thoughtful, concise prose. The author is also able to effectively refute some of the arguments that would likely be raised by the opposition, and he also makes reference to areas where the original argument may have benefited from additional material. For these reasons, this essay would likely score at least a 4.

The essay author describes in detail the merits of the original argument, such as how it referenced the fact that the Constitution has already undergone multiple revisions and that the framers seemed to have anticipated this when the document was authored. He also applauds the author of the initial argument by foreseeing the argument about conventions possibly not expressing the wishes of the American people, by noting that at least 38 states would have to be on board before any changes could be made.

The essay author also points out where the initial argument falls short, such as when it fails to clarify its remarks about the divisive political climate and what the other method of amending the Constitution (as opposed to calling a convention) might be. In doing so, the essay author also outlines his thoughts about what could be added to the essay to strengthen it, demonstrating he gave considerable thought to the issue.

In addition to showing a solid understanding of the subject matter and the arguments that can be made for or against it, the author’s writing is strong and consistent throughout and is largely free of any grammatical or spelling errors. The combination of thoughtful analysis, thorough assessment of the argument’s strengths and weaknesses, and strong writing skills ensures that the essay should not score below a 4.

Sample Prompt #2

The following appeared in the editorial section of a city newspaper:

“As incidents of school violence continue to dominate American mainstream media, educators, legislators and parents continue to seek out methods of countering it. One proposed solution is to arm America’s teachers, so that they have what they need to act fast if the need arises. The Second Amendment already grants Americans the right to bear arms, so why should teachers, who are in charge of some of society’s most vulnerable, be any different? Our teachers already assume a tremendous level of responsibility simply by teaching and guiding our children during the school day, and arming them would simply make it easier for them to accept more responsibility for protecting the nation’s children, if the need arises. Teachers undergo background checks before working with children, and these checks should help weed out any potential dangers or violent offenders before they get in the classroom — or get their hands on guns.”
Examine this argument and present your judgment on how well reasoned it is. In your discussion, analyze the author’s position and how well the author uses evidence to support the argument. For example, you may question the author’s underlying assumptions or consider alternative explanations that may weaken the conclusion. You can also provide additional support for or arguments against the author’s position, describe how stating the argument differently may make it more reasonable, and discuss what provisions may better equip you to evaluate its thesis.

Sample response to essay #2

The author of the prompt is trying to argue that teachers should be armed in the classroom to enhance the safety of all students and ensure a quick response in the event of an emergency or intruder. While some of the arguments made therein are strong points, the author fails to pay much attention to some of the more obvious arguments against arming educators — and the strength of the argument suffers as a result.
By failing to take into account oppositional arguments — such as the fact that kids have a way of getting their hands on just about anything, and there’s no reason to think this wouldn’t also hold true for guns — the author doesn’t give himself or herself a chance to address, or better yet, refute them. Another example of this is when the author notes that teachers undergo background checks, which, he or she reasons, will keep the bad apples out of America’s schools. This, however, only holds true if you believe the assumption that the only people out there with the potential to be dangerous are people who have offended before. But every offender had to have a first time, right? So this argument falls a little flat. The language the author uses when he or she says “these checks should weed out any potential dangers” makes it sound as if even he or she isn’t speaking with a whole lot of conviction.
Where the prompt does make you think is when it raises the point about how much responsibility our teachers already have every day. The very nature of the job means most parents have to have a certain amount of trust in them, but the same could be said of having a babysitter — does that mean all babysitters should be armed, too? Because the author of the prompt fails to consider, address, or refute the arguments on the other side, it ultimately fails to convince.

Dissection of essay #2

The essay response to the argument made in the prompt is thoughtful, analytical, and, for the most part, well written, although there are a few small errors here and there (more on that later). The response successfully identifies the prompt’s strengths and weaknesses, and the essay author also offers some strong advice about where the argument might have been strengthened, indicating strong comprehension of the subject matter.

Among the key strengths of the essay response is that the essay author references the fact that kids have the ability to get their hands on almost anything. This raises a very strong point against arming teachers in America’s schools, and it also points out an area where the original argument was lacking. The essay makes another strong point (another argument against arming teachers) when the author mentions the fact that background checks are only going to keep out teachers who have offended before, not every possible dangerous person out there.

The areas in which the essay response falters tend to be related to grammar and style. The essay switches back and forth between the second and third person, which affects its overall strength (and ultimately, its score, too). While the majority of the essay is written in the third person, the author switches to second person in the second paragraph, where she says, “only holds true if you,” and again in the third paragraph, where she says, “the prompt does make you think.” The overall strength of the essay would have been better if the essay author had picked one point of view and stayed consistent with it throughout the copy.

There are several other grammatical errors that also distract a reader from the actual content in the essay. For example, the second-to-last sentence in the essay is missing a comma between “them” and “but.” If a complete sentence appears on either side of the conjunction, a comma is needed for clarity. This response would likely receive a score of 4.

Sample Prompt #3

The following argument appeared in a parenting blog:

“Americans are raising a generation of children that don’t know how to lose. Nowadays, our kids receive praise in the form of trophies for just about anything, from participating to perfect attendance. Not only does this tend to make our kids more ‘soft’ and uneasy once they make it to the ‘real world,’ where they are prone to losing at least once in a while, but it also gives our children the impression that losing is so utterly terrible that we simply cannot let it happen anymore. NOT giving awards for any and everything teaches kids that awards must be earned, and talents have to be honed. It teaches them that it can take some time to excel in a given area, and that’s just fine.”
Examine this argument and present your judgment on how well reasoned it is. In your discussion, analyze the author’s position and how well the author uses evidence to support the argument. For example, you may question the author’s underlying assumptions or consider alternative explanations that may weaken the conclusion. You can also provide additional support for or arguments against the author’s position, describe how stating the argument differently may make it more reasonable, and discuss what provisions may better equip you to evaluate its thesis.

Sample response to essay #3

The author of the prompt clearly believes that trophies and awards are too broadly distributed among today’s kids and that giving awards for participation and such sends the wrong message. After an initial read, it is safe to say the author makes some compelling arguments that might even be strong enough to convince opponents that giving out awards too freely actually does children a disservice.
Among the stronger arguments made in the prompt is the fact that if children do not learn how to lose during adolescence, they may struggle with disappointment once they enter the adult world, where most everyone tends to fail or lose at one time or another. Another key point made in the prompt is when the author says that giving awards for everything gives children the impression that losing is so terrible it cannot be tolerated. In both statements, the prompt’s author drives home the point that what children are taught during childhood tends to transcend into their adult lives. Just as a child who grows up in an abusive home may, too, perpetuate the cycle of abuse, a child who grow up never losing may grow up to be an adult who has tremendous struggles with failure, and his or her life may be impacted negatively as a result. The author also notes that, by NOT giving awards for participation, kids learn the value of hard work and that it takes time and practice to be the best at something.
The author’s argument is sound and thoughtful, and the only area where it might have benefited from additional copy is if it had included some points that might refute arguments made on the other side. For example, youth sports are youth sports for a reason, and not every 6-year-old is dreaming of one day playing in the big leagues. Shouldn’t kids who will likely never pick up a bat or ball again receive at least some level of recognition for taking part in an activity? Ultimately, however, the argument made in the prompt is quite strong, and the author evidently took the time to clearly articulate his or her thoughts.

Dissection of essay #3

Though the author of the essay response never clearly stated his own feelings about whether today’s kids are awarded too many trophies just for “participating,” it sounds as if he might have initially leaned toward the other side of the argument — that kids should be given participation trophies — but then thought twice or reconsidered after reading the argument made in the prompt.

Evidence of this can be found in the last line of the first paragraph, when the essay author notes that the prompt’s compelling arguments “might even be strong enough to convince opponents.” This demonstrates that the essay author had a strong, comprehensive understanding of the arguments made in the initial prompt, and that he gave them all thoughtful consideration before crafting the essay response. This attention is also evident when the essay author introduces the comparison regarding children who grow up in abusive homes. While the subject matter might be a bit of a stretch, the comparison does have merit, and some may see it as adding strength to the original argument against giving awards for just about anything.

The essay author also points out where the original prompt might have been strengthened while pointing out one of the main arguments the opposition might make, which again demonstrates that the essay author took the time to carefully consider the issue and respond appropriately. Additionally, the essay response is formulated well: It begins by briefly summarizing the issue discussed in the prompt, and then calls out the essay’s key strengths as well as the areas where it faltered slightly before adding in some suggestions about how it might have been strengthened. Because the essay author formulated the response well, clearly considered the arguments made in the original prompt, and took the time to call out the strengths and weaknesses of the initial argument, it is safe to assume this essay would score around a 5. It also is largely free from spelling or grammatical errors or any glaring inconsistencies, which should also contribute to a favorable score.

Sample Prompt #4

This argument appeared in a legal motion:

“In many states, sex offenders are not allowed to use social media sites that also allow children to use them, such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and so on. Some believe the ban ought to be enacted at the federal level. Sex offenders, however, already face a myriad of restrictions in their day-to-day lives that impede their abilities to find employment and housing, interact socially and with loved ones, and stay current on the world around them. Once they have served their sentences and paid their debts to society, they should be allowed to reintegrate into the outside world in the same manner as other criminals. It is also often forgotten that sex offenders, too, have civil rights. Banning them from modern forms of communication is a violation of free speech and the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and for that alone, it should not be tolerated.”
Examine this argument and present your judgment on how well reasoned it is. In your discussion, analyze the author’s position and how well the author uses evidence to support the argument. For example, you may question the author’s underlying assumptions or consider alternative explanations that may weaken the conclusion. You can also provide additional support for or arguments against the author’s position, describe how stating the argument differently may make it more reasonable, and discuss what provisions may better equip you to evaluate its thesis.

Sample response to essay #4

This argument sounds as if it is sympathetic to sex offenders, which is unimaginable. That being said, there are a few important points made that really make you think. Although, not enough to actually change your mind.
The most convincing argument made in the initial prompt is when the author suggests that keeping sex offenders from using social media is a violation of the First Amendment. It is very thought-provoking, because when the U.S. Constitution was written, there was no Internet. There was no Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram, so the Constitution’s framers couldn’t have possibly foreseen what was coming up the pike or addressed it in any kind of appropriate manner. However, the First Amendment is undeniably about protecting certain freedoms for all Americans, and for that reason, the argument at least has merit.
However, the prompt’s author seems to be making excuses for sex offenders and expressing sympathy when he or she goes on about how they already have other restrictions imposed on them that make it hard to find work and place to live, among other things. Of course they should face restrictions — they are sex offenders. They shouldn’t, as the prompt states, “be allowed to reintegrate into the outside world in the same manner as other criminals,” because they aren’t other criminals, and many of them commit crimes against children. Therefore, the only particularly strong argument made is the one about the First Amendment.

Dissection of essay #4

Arguably, the biggest takeaway from the essay response is that the essay’s author seemed to have a difficult time analyzing the strength of the argument without letting her own personal feelings about the sensitive subject matter cloud her judgment. This is apparent in statements such as, “Of course they should face restrictions — they are sex offenders” and “they aren’t other criminals.”

The main point of drafting the essay is to thoughtfully and analytically evaluate the strength of the argument itself — not to include your own personal opinion on the subject matter. There are also some structural and grammatical issues that will likely affect the essay writer’s score. Redundancy is among the issues, as the essay references the strength of the First Amendment statement several times.

Other issues include the lack of a comma after “of course” in the final paragraph, and the sentence fragment, “Although, not enough to actually change your mind,” that appears in the introductory paragraph. It’s also worth pointing out that the author of the essay has a tendency to switch back and forth between second (you, your, and so on) and third person throughout the copy, which can be distracting. In the intro paragraph, the essayist makes statements such as “really make you think,” but the entire following paragraph switches back to third person. As a general rule, it’s best to pick a point of view and stick with it.

The essay isn’t entirely bad — the point about how the Internet wasn’t around when the Constitution was drafted, for example, is a strong one. However, the other issues will likely keep it from scoring above a 3.