Protected: Sample essay: In the modern world, image is everything. Discuss.

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Password:

Protected: Sample essay: In a world where borders are vanishing, is it futile for Singapore to persist in building a national identity? (Essay 1)

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Password:

Protected: Sample essay: In a world where borders are vanishing, is it futile for Singapore to persist in building a national identity? (Essay 2)

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Password:

Protected: Sample essay: In a world where borders are vanishing, is it futile for Singapore to persist in building a national identity? (Essay 3)

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Password:

GP Essays: Common mistake #3

Pay due attention to additional terms or any embedded context in the question. Examiners put such terms/phrases there for a reason – they aren’t simply there to make the question longer or to give you extra information; they need to be dealt with. With this in mind, it might be helpful to ask yourself:

1) What would I argue if the additional terms / embedded context were absent?

Once you have an answer, ask yourself:

2) How would I modify my argument to show an awareness of the additional terms /embedded context?

If you find that your argument is the same for both questions 1 and 2, it is likely that you’re missing part of the question requirements.

For example:

In a world where borders are vanishing, is it futile for Singapore to persist in building a national identity?

First, ask:
1) What would I argue if the additional terms / embedded context were absent? In other words, if it read:
“Is it futile for Singapore to persist in building a national identity?”

In this case, you might argue that no, it is not futile because there is value in Singapore persisting in building a national identity (then proceed to explain the value)
e.g. “SA national identity helps to build social cohesion, which is important in a multi-racial country like Singapore. Thus, Singapore must persist in building a national identity.”

[Note: the above example does not meet question requirements yet]

Next, ask:
2) How would I modify my argument to show an awareness of the additional terms /embedded context? In other words, considering the full question:
“In a world where borders are vanishing, is it futile for Singapore to persist in building a national identity?”

Here, you might argue that no, it is not futile because there is value in Singapore persisting in building a national identity, despite the fact that we might now also identify ourselves as global citizens (then proceed to explain why the two concepts (national identity vs a global identity) are not mutually exclusive and why national identity is still relevant in a globalised world).
e.g. “A national identity helps to build social cohesion, which is important in a multi-racial country like Singapore. Although cohesion might be achieved by our common identification as global citizens, being able to build a common national identity – over and above our common global identity - is likely to foster social cohesion even more effectively as it gives us one more thread of connectedness to our fellow citizens”

[Note: This now meets question requirements]

Task 1:

Write a thesis statement that answers the question, “In a world where borders are vanishing, is it futile for Singapore to persist in building a national identity?” Your thesis statement must show an appreciation of the requirements behind the embedded context (“in a world where borders are vanishing”). You may choose to agree or disagree with the question.

 

Task 2:

Read the sample essays (see “Sample essays” on the sidebar) on this question. Pick out the arguments raised, and highlight how the embedded context was included in the argument.

Example 1:
Argument: Building a national identity is futile because it is impossible, given that we are constantly influenced by other cultures which erode our Singapore culture.
Embedded context:”given that we are constantly influenced by other cultures which erode our Singapore culture”

Example 2:
Argument: Globalisation has resulted in the rise of soft power. However for Singapore to excercise soft power, she must have a national identity – making it crucial that Singapore persists in building one.
Embedded context: “Globalisation has resulted in the rise of soft power.”

Update: “I need help with paraphrasing!”

Post updated here.

A sample introduction: The world would be a better place if everyone spoke the same language.

Writing an effective introduction isn’t easy because it’s far more than just a first impression in words. In the context of a GP essay, it needs to encompass the biggest issues you’re going to deal with and, ideally, capture the complexity of the issues in just a short paragraph.  Which means that to do so, you must have unpacked the question requirements, identified and played with the issues behind the question, considered the counter-arguments, experimented with various possible angles of approach, and finally decided on how you intend the entire essay to shape up. In other words, it’s more than just weaving a few nice quotations into the definitions of the topic words and remembering to attach a stand at the end.

-

Example:

“The world would be a better place if everyone spoke the same language”. Discuss.

An American tourist who speaks only English may attempt, desperately, to get a message across in a small Chinese town in. They might fail miserably and lament the inconvenience of the language barrier. Within the European Union, the problems are arguably less trivial – translatingdocuments costs the EU up to 800 million euros annually, and it slows the decision making process. If only everyone spoke the same language – acommon language, or a lingua franca – the world would be better off. Or would it? Even if we argue for bi- or multi-lingualism, where speaking acommon language does not mean losing our native one, might we still lose our culture and the treasured diversity in our world? And if so, is the tradeoff worth it? Because the issues here are complex, it is rather simplistic to argue that every single person on this planet needs to speak the same language in order to reap benefits. So while the world would be a better place if more people spoke a common language, it is unnecessary – and, in fact, detrimental – for every single person to do so.

-

Comments and feedback:

Comment 1
I like how it’s packed with almost everything [which shows] a lot of complex thought processes:

- A relevant, interesting scenario that alludes to the issue
- An understanding of the premise (language barrier is inconvenient)
- Wider issue (translation)
- Embedded clarification of ‘everyone spoke the same language’ (monolinguailsm vs bi-/multilingualism)
- Evaluation (simplstic)
- Nuanced thesis (keep ‘better’, challenge absolute term ‘everyone’) + extension of thesis (judgement beyond ‘better’ / ‘detrimental’ — unnecessary)

Comment 2
Some examiners get annoyed with introductions that string too many questions together.
Another slant to consider is also the idea that not all languages are necessarily spoken languages. [For example, you could argue that]  it’s helpful to have a same language but these should be the languages that are devoid of political baggage (eg. music, sports, art, etc). Spoken languages will always have some sort of political baggage and the choice of one over another may trigger off more conflict and discontent.

-

Note: In light of the potentially annoying questions, the introduction may be revised, as follows:

If only everyone spoke the same language – a common language, or a lingua franca – the world would be better off. Or so it might seem, because even if we argue for bi- or multi-lingualism, where speaking acommon language does not mean losing our native one, we might  still lose our culture and the treasured diversity in our world.  Because the issues here are complex [...]

-

GP Essays: Common mistake #2 (example-driven essays)

Avoid example-driven essays.

Examples are crucial, but they’re meant to support your argument – avoid using lengthy case studies as replacements for arguments.

GP Essays: Common mistake #1 (absolute terms)

It is usually easier to argue against (disagree with) terms like “always”, “never” and “nothing”. Conversely, it is usually easier to argue for (agree with) terms like “ever”.   In other words, you should always disagree with the absolute stand. This is because the abovementioned approach merely requires you to identify one instance which proves the point.

To illustrate:

Arguing against (disagreeing with) terms like “always”, “never” and “nothing”:

‘Nowadays, the pleasures of reading can never compete with the pleasures of visual entertainment.’ To what extent do you agree? (2008)

Disagreeing is fairly easy – disagreeing means that you just need to prove one reason why the pleasures of reading can compete with the pleasures of visual entertainment.

Agreeing is more challenging –  it means that you need to convincingly prove that in every single possible circumstance, the pleasures of reading cannot compete with the pleasures of visual entertainment.

Arguing for (agreeing with) terms like “ever”:

Can the media ever be relied upon to convey the truth? (2003)
Agreeing is fairly easy – agreeing means that you just need to prove one instance in which the media can be relied upon to convey the truth.

Disagreeing (arguing that the media can never be relied upon to convey the truth) is more challenging – it means that you need to convincingly prove that in every single possible circumstance, we cannot trust the media to provide us with the truth.

 

Thus, due to the different demands of each stand, most people find it easier to convincingly argue against the absolute stand. However, it must be noted that if you manage to argue for the absolute stand, that would be one impressive essay!

Update: “I need help with paraphrasing!”

Updates to the “I need help with paraphrasing” post are marked out in the original post with a date stamp.