Assessing Your Writing Compare your essay to the following rubric, adapted from the official Present Your Perspective on an Issue rubric, to assess your writing. The rubric lists the criteria by which each official GRE reader assesses your work. SCORE 6 An essay with a score of 6 expertly develops and supports a compelling argument on a given topic. The posi- tion is skillfully analyzed and written. The essay at this level includes the following attributes: ■ a perceptive position on the issue ■ compelling and persuasive examples and reasons ■ a well-developed, well-focused, and well-organized analysis and point of view ■ ideas that logically connect to each other ■ effective vocabulary, word choice, and sentence variety, communicating ideas fluently and precisely ■ adept skill at using the conventions (i.e., grammar, usage, and mechanics) of standard written English, perhaps with minor errors S CORE 5 An essay with a score of 5 is thoughtful and well developed. It analyzes the issue and presents a position clearly and effectively using good examples. The essay at this level includes the following attributes: ■ a thoughtful position on the issue ■ a well-developed position using logically sound reasons and/or compelling examples ■ generally good organization and focus ■ clearly connected and communicated ideas ■ appropriate vocabulary and sentence variety ■ skillful use of the conventions of standard written English, perhaps with minor errors SCORE 4 An essay with a score of 4 reveals a proficient analysis of the issue. The writing sufficiently articulates meaning. The essay at this level includes the following attributes: ■ a clear, developed position on the issue ■ relevant reasons and/or examples ■ sufficient focus and organization ■ ideas are usually presented acceptably clear ■ general control of the conventions of standard written English, with some errors – THE GRE ANALYTICAL WRITING SECTION– 55 SCORE 3 An essay with a score of 3 reveals some competent analysis of the issue and communicates some meaning, but contains apparent flaws. The essay at this level contains at least one of the following flaws: ■ vague or limited analysis of the issue ■ weak development of a position on the issue ■ weak or irrelevant reasons or examples selected ■ shaky focus and organization ■ lack of clarity due to poor language use and sentence structure ■ occasional major errors or recurrent minor errors in grammar, usage, or mechanics that may confuse the reader and obstruct meaning SCORE 2 An essay with a score of 2 reveals significantly weak analytical writing skills. The essay at this level contains one or more of the following flaws: ■ unclear, limited, weak development of a position on the issue ■ poor presentation of analysis of issue ■ few, if any, reasons or examples selected — if evidence is presented, it is weak and irrelevant ■ lack of focus and/or organization ■ significant problems in the use of language and sentence structure that regularly obscure meaning ■ major errors or repeated minor errors in grammar, usage, or mechanics that repeatedly confuse the reader and obstruct meaning SCORE 1 An essay with a score of 1 shows essential absence of analytical writing skills. The essay at this level contains one or more of the following flaws: ■ little or no indication of understanding and analysis of the issue ■ little or no indication of the ability to develop an organized piece of analytical writing ■ critical problems in language and sentence structure — errors persistently interfere with meaning ■ ubiquitous errors in grammar, usage, or mechanics resulting in unintelligible writing SCORE 0 An essay with a score of 0 does not relate to the topic, is written in a foreign language, is a restatement of the prompt, or is illegible, blank, or otherwise totally incomprehensible. – THE GRE ANALYTICAL WRITING SECTION– 56 Practicing By now, you should be ready to practice for Presenting Your Perspective on an Issue. There are 20 sample prompts at the end of this chapter to use as practice. Keep in mind what you have read in this section as you begin practicing. For the first few prompts, take your time choosing an issue, deciding on a position, plan- ning, and writing your essay. After you feel more comfortable, try to stick to the 45-minute time limit by which you will be forced to abide on the official test. Remember, this writing task tests your critical thinking skills and how well you express yourself in writing. If you practice sensibly, using the steps outlined in this section, you should be prepared to ace this test come test day. Analyze an Argument—Attack Mode This 30-minute task in the Analytical Writing section requires you to analyze an argument that someone else has constructed. Unlike the Issue task, you will not be taking a position on and writing about an issue in this task. For the Argument task,you will be required to critically examine the reasoning and evidence used in someone else’s argument. You will be given a short passage, about a paragraph in length, that makes a case. The author will pres- ent evidence and reasons to support his or her position. Your job is to carefully examine the case, looking crit- ically at the support provided, the specific claim that was made, and any assumptions the author made without providing support or evidence. Look at the structure of the argument, examining the author’s line of reasoning for logical connections and logical fallacy. Purpose of the Argument Task The purpose of this task is to see how well you can understand, analyze, and evaluate an argument in writing. As a graduate student, you will be required to analyze readings insightfully and explain your analysis effectively to your professors and academic peers. Therefore, this task assesses your ability to evaluate the logic and relia- bility of an argument, while employing your critical thinking, perceptive reading, and analytical writing skills. It is easy to forget what you are not being asked to do on this task. Unlike the Issue task, you will not be required to formulate a position on the issue. In fact, in your Argument essay, you should not talk about whether you agree or disagree with the argument, or even whether the report the author gives is accurate.You should do the following: ■ Talk about the argument the author makes. ■ Examine whether the conclusions drawn and line of reasoning employed by the author are valid. ■ Analyze the thinking that went into the argument. ■ Scrutinize the logical accuracy of someone else’s argument. – THE GRE ANALYTICAL WRITING SECTION– 57 Parts of an Argument As you break down the argument into different parts, it may be helpful to know the following terms: ■ claim: an assertion about the truth, existence, or value of something ■ argument: a discussion of a position, claim, or case that is supported by reasons and evidence ■ conclusion: the main or overall claim in an argument ■ premise: claim that supports the conclusion While you will not be required to know these particular terms for the test, it is helpful to understand the differ- ent parts of an argument. Your analysis will flow more easily if you think of breaking down the argument and discussing each of these pieces. 58 In this task, you will be revealing your abilities to identify assumptions, weaknesses, and fallacies as you ana- lyze an argument. The task directions tell you to “discuss how well reasoned you find this argument.” So your first order of business is to examine the given passage. Examining the Argument For the Argument task, you will not be required to know any technical analytical terms or systems of analy- sis. You may have learned some terminology for fallacies or analysis in your undergraduate classes, but you are not required to have any specific kind of knowledge of any particular subject matter. Instead, you will be assessed on how well you understand, analyze, and evaluate an argument, as well as on how well you convey your analysis in writing. According to Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, an argument is “discourse intended to persuade.” It is a discussion of a position, claim, or case that is supported by reasons and evidence.You have already prac- ticed this type of persuasive discussion in the Issue task. In fact, you have learned how to formulate and sup- port an argument or claim. Now, for this task, you will need to start by breaking down the argument into its various parts to understand what the claim is really saying. You want to understand how all these individual parts work together to produce the argument. To examine the given argument, you will need to read the claim carefully, most likely more than once. Start by identifying the issue (or issues) presented and the position the author takes on that issue. Then, you can begin to break down the argument into its individual components. First, name as many claims, assumptions, and conclusions as possible. Identify each individual piece of evidence and support that the author presents in the argument. Make special note of any assumptions — something that is taken for granted to be true; it may or may not be explicitly stated — the author makes in the passage. Once you have identified the individual parts of the argument, see whether these pieces of support actu- ally support the point the author is trying to make. Think of what kinds of evidence you might select if you had been the author of the passage, such as: ■ Would they have been the same kinds of examples? ■ Would you have chosen different ones? Why? ■ Does the author’s evidence or data really support the conclusion? ■ What other evidence can you think of that the author did not include? ■ Would this evidence have supported or weakened the author’s claim? ■ Are there other explanations, besides the ones given, that they author did not address? ■ Is there a particular kind of evidence that you know of that contradicts the author’s evidence? ■ What changes might make the author’s reasoning more logical or sound? ■ Does the conclusion seem logical given the evidence or data the author provided? By making note of the answers to these questions as you read through the argument, you will have an easier time deciding what to address in your critique. Remember, the argument you will be given in this task pur- posely includes flaws in reasoning and logic, so if you break down the argument into its parts, you should be able to see where these flaws lie. Identifying Flaws in Logic and Reasoning Now that you have broken the argument down, it should be easier to identify the parts of the argument you want to critique. When you present your critique, you want to critique the major flaws of the argument, so you are looking for serious errors in the argument. Do not worry whether the claim seems correct or true, and do not mention whether you agree or disagree with the claim. This is not the point of the task. Your assignment is to evaluate how the pieces of the argument are put together, whether they are logically sound, and how well each piece of evidence supports the claim. There are several different kinds of flaws you are likely to see in the arguments given in this task. The following list will explain the most common logical flaws found in this task. COMMON FLAWS Using circular reasoning or already assuming the statement is true though it’s what you are supposed to be proving Example: That restaurant is the best one in town because I like it. Claiming that one event caused another when there may be no logical connection Example: When I got home from my vacation, my fish was dead, so I know that my room- mate did not feed it. – THE GRE ANALYTICAL WRITING SECTION– 59 Critiquing Tips ■ Evaluate any statistics or data in relation to the sample size and population. The numbers might not actu- ally represent what the author claims they do. ■ Keep in mind that an argument must have a premise and a conclusion, but the premise or conclusion may be unstated. ■ If the premise is missing, ask yourself if there are any assumptions that must be true for the argument to be valid. Find the missing link between the premise and conclusion. ■ Remember that a premise for one conclusion can be the conclusion of a subargument. ■ Conclusions must be based on the evidence in the passage. If there is no relevant evidence for an option, it cannot be the correct answer. ■ Stick to the statements and claims in the argument that has been presented. Do not let your opinion on the matter influence your critique of the argument. ■ You do not need to name a fallacy or flaw in logic—you just need to be able to recognize that something is wrong with the argument. 60 Claiming that most people do something, so it must be OK Example: It is OK to take office supplies from your office because everyone does it, so it is not stealing. Using a biased or inadequate sample of data as evidence Example: I know five people from Los Angeles and they are all superficial, so everyone from L.A. must be superficial. Suggesting only one or two alternatives when the issue is more complex and might have more alter- natives than those described Example: I did well in school because my brother did, too. Presenting a non sequitur, where the second part of the claim does not logically follow the first Example: Dayjon has an IQ of 180, so he will get an A on the test. Attacking a person instead of that person’s ideas Example: You are young; therefore, you do not know what you are talking about. Using someone’s popularity to prove a point about which he or she might have little or no authority Example: That NBA superstar says that standardized tests will improve schools’ accounta- bility, and that is why we should implement standardized tests in every school in the country. . serious errors in the argument. Do not worry whether the claim seems correct or true, and do not mention whether you agree or disagree with the claim. This is not the point of the task. Your assignment. with the argument, or even whether the report the author gives is accurate.You should do the following: ■ Talk about the argument the author makes. ■ Examine whether the conclusions drawn and line. Your assignment is to evaluate how the pieces of the argument are put together, whether they are logically sound, and how well each piece of evidence supports the claim. There are several different