Comprehension skills: The two most common ones

The two most common comprehension skills you will encounter are these:

SKILL 1. Identify + paraphrase

What you need to do:
For these questions, the answer comes straight from the passage. What you need to do is identify ALL relevant lines in the text that answer the question, and paraphrase them.

Common reasons why you may not get full marks for such questions:

- You missed points; you did not identify ALL the relevant points from the passage. Remember, it’s far safer to over-deliver in your answer. Writing additional information costs you time, but it could well gain you marks.

- You identified all the points, but missed out DETAILS in your paraphrase. Remember, details matter. Pay attention to the adjectives, the value words, the conjunctions “and” and “or”, and commas which separate different ideas.

- You tried, but lost marks due to inaccurate paraphrasing. To improve, work on your vocabulary, and practice, practice, practice!

Sample questions:
2009
- In paragraph 2, what resemblances does the author see between the behavior of children at play and that of the pups of hunting animals? (This one’s slightly tricky – it also requires comparison)

- Using your own words as far as possible, explain the author’s argument in paragraph 4

2. Definition in context

Typically, the question will include a short phrase or word in inverted commas. However, do note that this is not always the case. Similarly, just because there’s a word or phrase in inverted commas, it doesn’t necessarily mean that this is the skill required.

To answer these questions, your answer must show that you understand the definition of the word(s) in inverted commas, and you must incorporate the CONTEXT of this definition – so you’ll need to refer to the passage, identify the context, and paraphrase that context in your answer.

Realistic vs Possible

A number of people have made this mistake with the question,

“Is the elimination of global poverty a realistic aim?”

The error was that arguments considered the possibility of eliminating global poverty, rather than assessing whether it is realistic.

A classic sign of this error was the use of “if” in the topic sentence. For example, “Poverty can be eliminated if the poor are willing to accept education programmes.” This merely proves that it’s possible. In order to show that it’s a realistic aim, one would have to show that current education programmes ARE being accepted by the poor.

Dealing with two ideas: ‘Air travel should be discouraged, not promoted.’ Discuss.

Of the responses that I received to this question (not very many), most of them didn’t quite engage with the question. The most common response was to say that no, it should not be discouraged. The problem is that there are two ideas in the question, and these two ideas are linked – they must be dealt with together. In other words, arguing that “air travel should not be discouraged” doesn’t directly deal with the other part to this question – the issue of its promotion.

In order to deal with both parts, possible stands are:

YES (agreeing with the statement)

• Air travel should be discouraged, and it should not be promoted.

NO (disagreeing with the statement)

• Air travel should not be discouraged, and it should be promoted.
• Air travel should not be discouraged, but neither should it be (actively) promoted.

Regardless of your stand, you must engage with the concept of whether to promote it or not. A “no” essay that truly understands the requirements of this question will consider how and why air travel is currently being promoted, and discuss whether this is problematic.

If it isn’t problematic, this will naturally double up and show why it should not be discouraged. However, if you argue that it is problematic, you need to discuss whether we need to (actively) discourage it, or whether should we merely stop promoting it.

What the essay should not do is merely consider the benefits of air travel – while this shows why it should not be discouraged, it addresses the wrong debate when considering the second idea – on whether or not it should be promoted.

This made me smile

‘Modern scientists have a heavy moral responsibility.’ Comment on this statement.

“Modern scientists do not have a heavy moral responsibility because Science is neither moral nor immoral, neither good nor evil; it is amoral.”

-Wen Jian, T13

Essay: Writing slightly more sophisticated topic sentences

I’m working my way through some essay plans, and I’ve noticed it’s quite common to see “smaller” points in your topic sentences. To make your argument more sophisticated, state the BIGGER reason in your topic sentence, and use that smaller point in your elaboration and explanation instead.

For example, consider the following question:

Assess the impact of foreign films or foreign TV programmes on the culture of your society. (A level question)

I received a topic sentence that went like this:

“[Foreign TV programmes have had a negative impact on the culture of my society] because it affects what people wear due to the Western influences of TV shows”

There’s nothing wrong with this, but “affects what people wear” really is quite a small point. Ask yourself why it affects what people wear – and make that bigger, overarching reason the point in your topic sentence instead.

For example:

Foreign TV has a significant impact on my society due to its highly pervasive and easily accessible nature. In Singapore, we are constantly exposed to foreign – mainly Western – TV shows, from Gossip Girl and Project Runway to entire channels of K-pop. In the same way fashion trends on the red carpet become pervasive in fashion magazines and soon hit high street stores such as H&M and Topshop, thus influencing how people dress, our exposure to fashion trends on TV also influence the way we dress. With cable television being the norm, the vast majority of our TV time is, for most people, spent watching foreign channels, and seeing foreign celebrities dress in a particular way. This, in turn, has influenced the way people in my society dress. For example, enthusiastic fans of K-pop can be seen sporting K-pop-inspired outfits, those who appreciate Japanese culture may be seen sporting the popular Japanese look of wearing stockings, and those who worship Gossip Girl may be seen dressed in outfits inspired by the show. This is in sharp contrast to the situation in Singapore just two generations ago – the current day grandparents. Among that older generation, one may still spot an old lady wearing a kebaya, or an old man wearing a sarong. Just the other day, I spotted a grandmother at the bank with her two grandsons, wearing a cheongsam. This was a generation that did not experience such easily accessible and pervasive foreign TV – or much of any TV at all for that matter. Of course, one could rightly question whether the correlation was solely or mainly responsible for this observation. Yet, it is difficult to deny that we – especially the younger generation – are dressing the way foreigners are. How do we know how foreigners dress? Where does this influence come from? And a big part of that answer is foreign TV.

 

Task

Analyse the development of the above paragraph, stating what’s good and where there’s room for improvement. 

Essay Practice: Embedded context

Recap: Dealing with embedded context

Practice:

1. Is it possible to protect the environment when many countries require increasing amounts of energy to progress? (2007)

2. Should poor countries develop their tourist industry when the basic needs of their own people are not being met?

3. Should research into expensive medical treatments be allowed when only a few can afford them? (2007)

-

If you’re stuck on the first question, read the first comment below for hints on how to tackle this question. However, it is advisable that you attempt to plan this yourself first, and only refer to the hints to check whether you were on the right track.

Essay plans: Suggested templates

Different people have different needs. Here are a few suggested templates to guide you as you plan. Templates 1-2 are the most basic, and are recommended for those of you who still struggle to pass (13m and above for content); Template 3 aims to get you closer to 15m for content; Templates 4-5 are meant to push you towards anything from 17m-25m, and Template 6 is for you to pause and think about what a >19m script looks like.

Check them out here:

Essay Plans: Suggested templates

 

Essay skill: Subjectivity of key terms

One way to make essays essay slightly more sophisticated is to consider the subjectivity behind any, well, subjective terms. In the following example, consider the word “right”:

How far can our leaders be trusted to do what is right?

What does “right” mean?

• In line with the people’s needs? Their wants? Their demands? The most beneficial for the people? Morally correct? All of the above? And if so, what if there are conflicts between the different concepts of “right”?

Right for who?

• Perhaps a decision will be right for the overall progress of the country, but not for certain groups of individuals.

Timeframe

• Right in the short-term, long-term, or both? Might there be conflicts?

Does “right” exist?

• Could it be that there’s no true “correct answer”? Perhaps it’s merely a matter of making the most sensible decision at the time of decision-making – and this decision, in time, might prove to be either right or wrong.

-

Note: When considering the subjectivity of a term, you may choose to split your stand, as explained in this page of linked posts.

Listen to yourself: Would your opponents agree?

If they would, don’t bother including that point in your essay.

Pause and ask yourself: How strong does this argument sound? If you were to rank it on a scale ranging from trivial to significant, where would it lie? If you think it lies closer to the trivial, non-contentious arguments, dump it. If it’s an issue-laden, highly debatable, contentious argument (or at least, one that opponents would contend with), it’s a keeper.

For instance,

To what extent is the individual responsible for his own health?

I’ve seen an unexpectedly (and depressingly) large number of arguments about how infants, babies, toddlers and young children cannot be held responsible – rather,  it’s their parents’ responsibilities.

Well, yes. It’s logical, it makes sense. But it’s a rather silly argument – after all, people whose overall stand is a “small extent” stand wouldn’t contend with this. It’s trivial, it’s non-contentious. In other words, it’s incredibly dull, and shows poor awareness of the issues involved.

But we can keep the concept of considering age groups, and still come up with a sensible argument:

Some argue that the government should step in, and provide financial support for healthcare. Some might even argue that healthcare should be free. However, even when it comes to financial support, the individual should bear the bulk of the responsibility. Of course, this should apply to the population in general, and should not apply to everyone. In the case of elderly patients, before the government steps in, their children should be the ones to help support their healthcare costs.

This keeps the idea of some age groups having less responsibility for their own health, but considering the elderly is more sensible than considering infants as this is a more contentious issue – some people would argue that the elderly should have been responsible enough to buy insurance when they were younger, so that they wouldn’t have to worry about financing their healthcare in their old age. In other words, your opponents might disagree with your point, making it a point worth keeping – and, of course, a point that then needs to be defended with solid argumentation and exemplification.

This is what GP is about. Don’t hide behind trivial non-contentious arguments. Take on a debatable, contentious issue, and convince me that you’re right.

-

Recap: This post on “cherry-picking” also talks about avoiding non-contentious arguments.

AQ: Balancing “knowledge of your society” with “your personal experience”.

Check out Mr Foo’s AQ post on addressing, in a sensible way, the requirement for “from your knowledge (of your society)” and “from your personal experience”.