MCAT writing sample -how to develop an argument effectively

[confused007]

Hi everyone,

 

I recently started working on the writing section. I realized that when I have a lot of trouble developing an argument after providing examples. I tend to run out of ideas very quickly. Does anyone have any suggestions (ie. strategies, books that I can read)? Thanks so much for your help.

 

Confused

[medhopeful.com]

When you say you have trouble developing an argument after providing examples, do you mean you have trouble developing the rule/guideline that ties the two examples together?

 

I think you should always try to come up with the argument/rule first, and then use that to derive the examples (which is easy to do once you have the rule).

[tyw001]

Newpapers, websites (CNN, CBC, etc), googlefastflips (provides very good resources to look at headline news around the globe), anything would do actually. If you are into history, maybe brush up on some well-known people and their stories. That's pretty much all I can think of for now when i need to increase my data base.

 

Good luck!

[Sebriz]

check this out

http://www.wikipremed.com/mcat_essay.php

[nosuperman]

When I was studying for the MCAT and I had written a bunch of essays, I started to get a feel for examples that were versatile i.e. using the same general reference (though perhaps a different instance or facet of it) in multiple answers. I just studied a couple of these (Civil Rights movement, formation of the UN, some economic regulation examples, the Charter) and if I was every stuck for an ideal example - one that came to mind specifically for my current prompt - I'd revert to trying to use one of my trusty backups.

 

I also made an effort to read a lot. RSS feeds galore and the Economist. When I'd read something I was interested in I'd write down the key points and talk to my friends/family about it... that way I was actually becoming comfortable with the topic and I could use it in an essay. If you aren't interested in it then it'll be hell to remember it so I'd recommend finding a news source you can get yourself at least partially interested in.

 

Writing it down kinda sucked at first because lets face you write enough stuff down when you're prepping for the MCAT but after a while you write less and retain more and again, at least in my case, I was interested in the stuff so it was a welcome break from optics and o-chem.

[PastaInhaler]

Here's one that is closer to home and which may enable you to form stronger arguments because the topic is much more familiar to you. Try it out for size. Tell me why I would buy materials from Kaplan, or Princeton Review. Why would I use that as opposed to free materials from M.I.T., or WikiPreMed? Who do you think will get a higher score? Does it matter? Do you think people who refuse to buy books from Kaplan or Princeton Review are just being cheap or are they less dedicated than others who don't want to spend cash?

 

It is better to use purchased materials from prep companies than free and open-source study materials in preparation for the MCAT.

 

Write a unified essay in which you perform the following tasks. Explain what you think the above statement means. Describe a specific situation in which it is better to use free and open-source study materials in preparation for the MCAT. Discuss what you think determines when it is better to use purchased materials from prep companies and when it is better to use free and open-source study materials in preparation for the MCAT.

[PastaInhaler]

When you are arguing a point on the MCAT Writing Sample, you are really answering three questions:

 

1) What is your point?

2) You got some proof to back that up?

3) How does this work?/Can you explain it a bit more?

 

Guns don't kill people, people do.

 

Argument #1: People do the killing

 

1) What's your point? Guns don't actually kill people, but it is people who do the killing by loading the gun, pointing the gun at another person and pulling the trigger. They have the intent to cause harm to whatever is staring down the barrel of the weapon they are holding. If a person wanted to do cause harm to another person and kill that person, it doesn't matter what weapon he's got, the target is as good as dead if the intent was deep enough.

 

2) Do I have some proof, sure, here goes: Despite implementing a ban on hand guns, murder rates have not dropped. On the contrary, murder rates have increased this year over last.

 

3) How does this work? Well, you would expect that if killings were do to guns, fewer guns floating around from hand to hand would mean that there would be fewer murders. But, when there were fewer guns going around, the murder rates did not actually drop like anticipated. This would mean that guns don't have an effect on the murder rate, because guns aren't related to murder rates. We can conclude that if someone wants another person dead, he will do so by whatever means, even if it means killing by not using a gun.

 

I realized that this is someone contrived, and the example is made up, but you can sort of see where I am coming from when developing an argument. Arguments can seem foreign to most premeds, but not explaining a mechanism behind a reaction. That is essentially what is included in step/question 3). If you have trouble developing an argument, you should try and explain your point, and in the process of logically explaining, you end up arguing your point. So try and take this approach and see if that helps you argue your point.

 

e.g.

 

Why do you like Coke better than Pepsi?

(Why is Coke better than Pepsi? or Pepsi better than Coke?)

 

Why should cell phones be banned completely in lecture theatres?

(i.e. a cell phone detector with security guards stationed at the door, students with cell phones are refused entry) an extreme example, I know, but what would you argue? how would you prove your point?

-is completely banning them good?

-is it a violation of personal rights?

-personal safety? emergency situations?

 

Should CPR and first aid training be mandatory in high school?

 

Should interest rates on credit cards be restricted and regulated?

 

Is it right for the administration or municipal government be allowed to move homeless people out of the city because the city is having a big international conference or sporting event?

-what is more important here? tourism? rights of individuals?

 

Do doctors get paid too much or too little? What did they have to sacrifice?

What do they sacrifice now? Are they still sacrificing? What do they do for society? Is that less important than a teacher's contribution, or a basketball star's?

 

Should SUV driver's receive a higher tax to offset carbon emissions?

 

Think about how you would explain your point of view for each of these practice scenarios and you will develop ways to argue your point. And it usually occurs by simply explaining your point. It's quite easy, and you already have the skill set to do a good job of it.

[PastaInhaler]

You study for 2 hours straight, and are feeling a little zonked. Why is it a good idea to take 30 minutes off to play Nintendo Wii?