WS Feedback

[Murrae]

Hey all,

 

I've been working pretty hard at the MCAT studying and feel pretty good with with the PS/BS/VR sections, but haven't really had a crack with the WS section yet. I've done a bunch of research and have a good idea of how I should be structuring my essays, and was hoping someone could give me some feedback on the following essay I wrote. I wrote the thing in about 30 minutes on the dot, so I may need to speed things up a bit.

 

My main weakness is the fact that I'm not particularly educated in world issues, and as such I have a pretty bland set of real life examples I can pull from. Because of this, I usually use a hypothetical that is based on real life scenarios. For example, in my WS I talk about a worker at a refinery that has the right to work in a safe environment. I talk about how the safe environment was formed, specifically from learning from past mistakes of other workers and hazard analysis's.

 

In an ideal setting, I would be able to cite a story in which case a worker was hurt, but instead I just imply that it's already happened... do you see what I'm getting at? It's a semi-hypothetical, I guess? Anyways, some feedback on this issue and the WS be great. I write the MCAT July 31st, in case you were wondering.

 

Anyways, the essay:

 

PROMPT:

A country needs enemies, real or imagined, in order to maintain its identity.

Describe a specific situation in which a country might not need an enemy in order to maintain its identity. Discuss what you think determines whether the existence of enemies is necessary for a country to maintain its identity.

 

ESSAY:

A country's identity -- the core set of values by which it is uniquely shaped -- is often maintained by conflict. When the values of a country are challenged, it forces the country to act in such a way that will uphold its values. By upholding its values, the country is reminded again and again as to why the value exists. This is an important step because the country is willing to enter a conflict over its identity; if the country did not value this part of its identity, then it may very well find it beneficial to not enter the conflict at all, and instead reevaluate the set of values which shape its identity. This constant reminder ensures that the importance of the value is not forgotten, and therefore the country's identity is maintained. Consider the value of one's right to privacy. In Canada, privacy is taken very seriously, but its seriousness often only comes to light when privacy is breached. Take, for example, the breach of a patient database in an Alberta hospital. The hospital was shown to have inadequate security measures to prevent against the breach, however the seriousness of the issue was not highlighted until a conflict arose -- the unauthorized copying of private patient records. Since the breach has been brought to the attention of the general population, other hospitals are now being closely scrutinized for the measures they take to protect patient data. Therefore, the country has become vigilant in maintaining its core value of an individual's right to privacy, all as a result of the conflict that arose from the Alberta hospital breach. Moreover, there are privacy issues arising due to Facebook -- a social networking internet website -- not complying with Canadian privacy policies. It is clear that constant privacy conflicts are required to remind Canadians of the importance they place in privacy.

 

However, there are values that shape a country's identity that can be maintained witthout the requirement of constant conflict. For example, individuals have a right to live and work in an environment that is free of hazards in Canada. Workers in an Alberta refinery are exposed to machinery that can be very dangerous, if operated incorrectly. There are many measures put in place to ensure that the worker can do the job safely and efficiently. Many of these measures have been implemented either as a result of hazard analysis or from mistakes that were made in the past. However, now that the mistakes have been made, there is very little sympathy if the mistake is made again, so long as the worker is sufficiently informed of the hazards and how to mitigate them. In this case, constant conflict is not required to uphold a worker's right to safety. In fact, it is the exact opposite -- constant reminders of past issues or mistakes are brought to the worker's attention to highlight the importance of the worker's safety, a core value shaping Canada's identity.

 

It has been shown that a country's core set of values can be maintained by some form of conflict. The distinction between whether constant conflict or initial conflict is required is determined by the values that are being upheld. If the value being upheld is one that can be ambiguous and changing, such as privacy, then constant conflict is required to constantly remind the country of the definition of the value and why they uphold it. However, if the value is distinct and does not change with time, then initial conflicts may be necessary to teach a country about its importance. In the future, however, the conflict should no longer be required -- the country has been taught the importance of the value, and it is now their responsbility to uphold it at all costs.

[MCATStrategy]

First of all, those -- that you have in your definitions should be commas.

 

My initial feeling overall is that the essay does not address the writing prompt tasks sufficiently. It feels like you went off on a tangent over values and lost sight of the focus of the prompt. The key word in the prompt is "enemies" and your essay does not address the issue of enemies either in your thesis or anti-thesis.

 

For your first example, valuing privacy is not really unique to Canada and therefore is not really part of its identity. Many countries value privacy and I don't think privacy is one of those unique traits that we Canadians define as part of our identity. Multi-cultulism, diversity and possibly even peacekeeping are what come to mind when you think of Canadian identity. So I think another example should have been used.

 

For your second example, there is also no mention of enemies real or imagined. The two examples feel so close together that it doesn't really create enough contrast. Again, I don't think the value of working in a safe work place is really an identity.

 

When you use the word conflict, there should be some mention of enemies since it is part of the prompt. Additionally, I don't feel conflict is used appropriately here. There isn't really conflict in either of your examples.

 

Sorry to pick your essay apart. I just think that you didn't address the enemies or identity part correctly and instead went off on a tangent about values. Overall, the writing style is fine. However, the primary problem is the arguments presented. They don't really hold up very well and the examples do not really illustrate the prompt well.

[Murrae]

Thanks for your help. I may follow up with another essay (with a bunch more practice) which hopefully should address your concerns. I'll post it in the near future, hopefully you'll be willing to give some feedback / see if I've improved.

 

Do you have any suggestions for websites that list to a large DB of good examples? I've watched your videos (which are great BTW, thanks for those) and have been getting on the sources you've suggested.