Writer's Corner: Free Essay Grading by PastaInhaler

[ameltingbanana]

Thanks again for marking the essays (clicked). That ripple thing is nifty, great idea on your part. Cheers

 

 

The object of education should be to teach skills, not values.

Education is often lauded as a means to a job or career, through the development of a specific skillset unique to the field. A highly specialized diploma program requiring a specialized skillset, such as a college plumbing certification would not be overly concerned with the plumber’s disposition and core values – the crux of the matter would be his ability to fix leaking or malfunctioning pipes. His core beliefs do not require amendment or alteration, because the career he chose requires him, above all, to wield his skills efficiently and knowledgeably in pursuit of leaks and hazardous plumbing. His beliefs are almost irrelevant to the job he must perform, and the education he receives must then reflect that.

 

However, an education system focusing solely on skills does not cast a wide enough net to be considered an adage. In a field such as social work, where compassion and the desire to help your fellow human being is the currency of success, skills, though teachable, will matter little if the individual’s heart is not in the right place. Learning in such a context should seek to cultivate and impart these positive values, so that the right beliefs are in place for such a person to practice social work. The skills taught will only take properly if the right values are there to anchor them. These principles serve as the basis for a career founded on altruism and good nature, and a learning process reflecting and acknowledging this simple truth will see more success.

 

What is so different about these two situations, then, that they should each require distinct processes of education? The differentiating factor is the purpose or desired societal impact of the student. The plumber’s end goal is to fix household and industrial leakages in pipes – this job requires meticulous skill over a system of values, and so the objective of his education will reflect that. A social worker must be able to empathize with her patients in a desire to improve their lot – to even stand a chance at such empathy, she must have a value system that aligns with such a goal. As a result, her education should focus on imparting specific values, rather than a specific skillset, on her, so that she may be successful in her chosen vocation. Education can then be considered mutable – depending on the ends in sight, it should seek to focus on objectives specifically tailored to the situation at hand.

[pacemaker]

-Clicked-

 

In politics, money equals power.

 

Politics refers to social relations between nations as well as relations between the governing authority and the citizens. In order for an individual or party to become successful in politics, it is highly important that they possess great power. In this case, power refers to having the rights to make decisions and to influence a great number of other individuals. As such, it is commonly believed that in the field of politics, money equals power. A more specific example is that of the G20 summit held in Toronto in 2010. During this summit, leaders from the 20 wealthiest nations were invited to discuss the issue of the recent recession. Some of the nations included Canada and the United States. These countries hold the greatest amouns of monetary wealth in comparisons to others around the world. At the same time, due to the monetary wealth, they are able to possess great amounts of power on a global scale. As such, these countries are known to be the most influential nations in the world. Therefore, this illustrates that great political, economic and social powers lie in the hands of the nations that have the greatest amounts of money, further equilibrating money with power.

 

In contrast, it is not always necessary to view money as being equal to power. Many politicians and countries have been able to become successful despite of not having a huge sum of money. For example, Mahatma Gandhi played a major role in the uprising of politics in India. He was able to succeed due to his great leadership skills and strong moral values that included the route of non-violence towards attaining freedom and independance for India. Moreover, at the time of the British Rule in India, India was not considered as a major country in the world nor did it possess great sums of money. However, the country as a whole was able to protest against the British Empire and achieve freedom. Thus, when faced with a national crisis, other factors such as great determination on the part of the masses and strong moral values and leadership skills of the leaders can equal power despite of an absence of significant amounts of money.

 

In conclusion, in the field of politics, power plays a major role as it determines the decision making capacities of various politicians and political parties. Thus, money can be equated to power when dealing with situations on a global scale. For example, the recent G20 summits in Toronto included meetings between the leaders of the 20 wealthiest nations around the world to dicuss the issues underlying the recent global recession. In this case, plans to recover from such recssions and other major decisions related to trade as well as sociopolitical ties between nations were discussed only by the leaders of the wealthiest nations. As such, when dealing with a crisis or concern on a global scale, money equals power and the wealthiest nations are granted the rights to making decisions. It is also important to note that such decisions inevitably effect a huge population of individuals around the world that also resides in poorer nations. On the other hand, when dealing with a national situation or crisis, other factors such as motivation, determination, leadership skills and moral values may be better indicators of power rather than money. This was illustrated in the example of India where the nation as a whole was able to aquire freedom and independance from the British Empire with the help of guidance and direction from great leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi. It is important to note that in the 1940’s, India was not a major country nor did it have significant wealth. Despite of such conditions, it was able to emerge as being one with great powers in the fight against the British Empire.

 

Thanks!

[atesme]

-clicked-

 

Here's another one. Thanks a bunch!

A nation's main concern should be to protect its international business interests.

 

We live in an increasingly small global environment. In today’s era of fast communications, every country in the world can expect to experience a unique interconnectedness with its peers. Therefore, national economic decisions cannot be made solely on a closed internal system. A country must attempt to further its international business interests because that is the only way it can gain power on a global scale. It is, after all, the richest countries in the world that tend to make the most decisions - the G20 summit comes to mind here.

 

Countries that seek to become forerunners in the international economy and heavyweights when it comes to international policy must allow their business sector to operate internationally. The competition with other companies that are foremost in their fields in the world serves as one of the most effective ways to keep an industry lean and clean. China knows this, and having its business compete on a global scale has been one of the government’s for a long time. Currently, the Chinese government controls 39 companies that are on the Forbes 500 list. Maintaining the status of these businesses and pushing other Chinese enterprises to join their fellows has been documented to be a deliberate policy of the Chinese government. China understands that in order to join other developed countries and become a global power, it must succeed economically on an international scale. Thus, one of the country’s priorities is to protect its international businesses.

 

However, becoming a leading world power is not necessarily the first goal in mind of some other countries. While we may all believe and hope that sometime down the road every country in the world can make its claim to economic success, there are some that are simply not ready to bid for such high goals. For example, the temporary government that has replaced Mubarak’s in Egypt is currently more concerned with keeping the country away from ruin, maintaining the banks and the stock market, and trying to pick up the pieces of the revolution. They are frantically trying to piece together a short term plan to stabilize the country. Perhaps sometime in the future after immediate concerns are dealt with Egypt might turn once again outwards and hope to achieve its place on the global market, but for now the governments’ hands are full dealing with purely domestic liabilities. In such a situation, it is understandable if their primary concerns center more on establishing a minimum wage and raising taxes than creating and maintain international businesses.

 

While some countries may be extremely concerned with carefully fostering their economic climate and maintaining industries that are powerful enough to operate in an international climate, others may be solely concerned for the interim with domestic matters. Whether or not the global economy is a priority for a country depends on their current goals. If problems are rampant within the country, then the government should focus more on fixing its internal issues before turning its eyes outwards. The Egyptian government, for instance, is doing just that. However, if there are no large domestic issues to address, then a country should attempt to expand its horizons and enter into the international sphere. That is the most reasonable next step. Countries that are ready for this step, such as China, must carefully plan and watch over its enterprises in order to ensure their success. In the end, a government’s domestic situation and long term goals determine which areas it should focus on. Governments should always want what’s best for their citizenship. What that is, however, varies depending on the country.

[PastaInhaler]

--clicked--

 

Governments have a responsibility to regulate companies that provide necessary services to citizens.

 

The role of a government within a society is to ensure the well being of the society as whole. This is achieved in many ways such as introducing and enforcing laws, providing public services to those in need, and regulating companies that provide necessary services to citizens. These necessary services include, but are not limited to, postal mail, health care, transportation, and even food. It is well known that the primary goal of any business is to make profit through their product. As such, it becomes the government's role to ensure that companies strike a necessary balance between the quality of the services they offer and the amount of profit they make. A prime example of this is the regulation of ingredients rich in trans fats used to make fast food such as burgers or fried chicken. It has been medically and clinically proven that exess dietary trans fats is the leading cause of obesity and cardiovascular diseases. However, the usage of ingredients filled with trans fats instead of, say for example extra virgin olive oil, in the making of fast food is cheaper. Thus, companies are able to invest less money in the product they produce and recieve greater return. With this in mind, several large scale fast food companies such as McDonalds and Kentucky Fried Chicken used ingredients rich in trans fats. Realizing the the detrimental effects of citizens consuming too many transfats, governments began to regulate the operations of these companies by imposing strict health guidelines on their products. In addition, it became mandatory that these companies offer healthy alternative food choices such as salads in their menus. As can be seen, companies in the fast food industry provide food which is a necesasry servies to citizens. Due to the negative impacts their products offer to the health of citizens, governments have a responsiblity to regulate these companies.

 

However, there are cases in which governments should not regulate companies that provide necessary services to citizens. These include small scale, privately owned companies that do not possess the power to affect citizens nationwide. A prime example of this is the small business called College Pro Painters (CPP) based in Edmonton, Alberta. This business provides painting services to households in need of a new paint job, whether for the walls of their home or just backyard fence. Families nowadays are so busy earning an income while taking care of their children that a tiring, long, side project such as re-painting their fence, is out of the question. It is these families that hire CPP to come do the job for them. CPP is a business run by students and as such, due to the limited resources students have, influencing citizens nationwide is not possible. As such, although they offer necessary services to citizens, their impact is not on a nationwide scale and therefore, should not be regulated by governments.

 

As mentioned above, one of the main roles a government plays in society is ensure the well being of the society as whole. Sometimes, in order to achieve this, governments must regulate companies that provide necessary services to citizens. However, this should not always be the case. What determines whether government regulation is necessary or not depends on scope of the effects of the service. In the case of companies in the fast food industry, they offer fast food which is a necessary service to citizens. However, many companies began to use ingredients that were medically proven to be unhealthy to citizens in attempts to gain more profit. As a result, government regulations were required and these companies must now adhere by strict health regulations regarding their product. In contrast, small businesses such as College Pro Painters offers painting servcies to its citizens. This service does not affect citizens on a nationwide scale as the business is small and its resources are limited. It follows then that businesses such as CPP should not be regul1ated.

 

thanks

 

You're welcome.

 

Thanks for clicking. Appreciated.

 

Adequate control of language.

Evidence of some clarity and depth of thought.

Some issues with integration.

 

You will need to define what you mean by a necessary service more clearly. Some graders may not agree that fast food establishments qualify as necessary services. Foodland Ontario may qualify as necessary, but not McDonalds or KFC.

 

As well, the counter-example is a bit weak. It doesn't really offer a company that provides necessary services. The services of CPP, while they may be important, are not services which, in their absence will have a strong negative impact on society, however, if Foodland Ontario were to collapse, such an impact will be quite evident.

 

I feel this essay will be scored an:

JKLMN/OPQRST

[PastaInhaler]

--clicked---

 

 

Compulsory education often inhibits a student's motivation to learn.

 

Education is the means to pass down information from one generation to the next- to equip them for the future to be as successful as possible, individually and amongst society. Thus, it comes to no surprise that Canada makes certain courses within its educational system compulsory, or mandatory, up until one has achieved a high school diploma. However, these mandatory courses, many argue often inhibit a student’s motivation to learn. A prime example is the mandatory music classes that one must take during their primary schooling. It is evident that not every individual has the same enthusiasm for music as others so as a result, when one who strongly dislikes music is forced to take a music class, their motivation to learn in that area drops dramatically. Research has proven that individuals who have a strong interest in a certain area of education and who pursue it, are motivated to excel in that area. Similarly, those who are opposed to that area of education, and yet are mandated to learn, do not excel. As can be seen, compulsory courses within education can often inhibit a student’s motivation to learn if one strongly disfavors the course.

 

In contrast, there are compulsory courses within education that do not inhibit one’s motivation to learn but rather spark one’s curiosity in that field. When a student has an open mind to the various possibilities in the future that certain courses offer, they do not approach compulsory courses with distaste but rather as a challenge and an opportunity to broaden their horizons. For example, the four core subjects, math, english, social studies, and science, are compulsory courses that one must take throughout their highschool career. Each of these courses are prerequistes for future courses in the same area of study. Therefore, high school math is required for those who want to pursue their study in the area of mathematics. With this in mind, those students who want to keep their options open in the future for post secondary education, take all of these compulsory courses. As a result, these courses do not inhibit their motivation to learn, but rather drives their motivation to acquire more knowledge in various fields of study such that their options are open in the future.

 

Whether compulsory education, more specifically, compulsory courses, inhibit one’s motivation to learn or not depends entirely on the mindset of the student. If a student is narrow minded and desires to only learn what he likes and disregard the courses he doesn’t, music for example, then courses that are mandatory that contradict his view will inhibit his motivation to learn. On the other end of the spectrum, those students who have open minds and realize the possibilities that certain courses, such as the four core subjects, offer for them in the future, enroll in these compulsory courses with the mindset of learning more to equip themselves better for future. Thus, as can be seen, it is the difference in mindset of students that determines whether one succeeds or one falls behind.

 

thanks alot pasta! i know im sending in a lot of essays haha..take your time. im just trying to get in as much practice as possible!

 

You're welcome.

 

Thanks for clicking. Appreciated.

 

Adequate control of language.

Evidence of clarity, depth, and complexity of thought.

Demonstrates proficiency in responding to the tasks.

Your examples are sufficient in supporting your arguments.

 

I feel this essay will be scored a:

JKLMNOPQ/RST

[PastaInhaler]

--clicked---

 

 

 

The media's use of unethical investigative practices is never justified.

 

The media is a tool to communicate and pass on knowledge from one individual to the next, one community to the next, and even from one nation to another. As such, media has become thoroughly integrated into humanity, and without it, there would be a massive loss of knowledge amongst society. In order for media to bring new information to society, they must use investigative practices. However, there are times when the media’s need to acquire new information have resulted in unethical practices- practices that infringe on the rights of citizens. A prime example of this is the recent allegations against the newspaper flagship, News of the World (NotW), owned by Rupert Murdoch. Recent investigations have shown that journalists employed by NotW have used unethical investigative practices in order to deliver stories to the public. These include hacking into phones of murder victims, soliders in the Iraq and Afghanistan War, and even bombing victims in the London 2005. This is seen as a direct violation of the privacy of indivduals and thus was deemed unethical and not justified as journalists were keen in only benefitting themselves through these stories. As a result of these allegations, criminal investigations have now proceeded and in an effort to protect himself, Murdoch has effectively announced the shut down of NotW. Evidently, this example depicts the unjustifiable act of unethical investigative practices.

 

However, there are cases in which unethical investigative practices by media are justified. For example, in the recent Anthony Weiner scandal, credit is given to various forms of media such as Twitter and text messages on mobile phones to have brought this scandal to light for the American public. Anthony Weiner, former senate out of New York, was found to have been posting nude pictures of himself through Twitter and sending salacious text messages to women outside of his marriage. Through investigations of the media into the private life of Weiner, which can be deemed as unethical, the American public was enlightened about the scandalous acts of their elected political official. As a result of this news, Weiner resigned from his position. Thus, in this case, unethical forms of investigative practices by media have resulted in the positive englightment towards the general public.

 

As can be seen, the media must draw a fine line and determine whether their unethical investigative practices are justified or not. If the practice involves infringement of privacy of individual, it is deemed unethical. Furthermore, if these practices benefit the journalists only, so that they can bring stories to the newspaper, but not society as a whole, these acts are classified as unjustifiable. This was seen in the recent allegations against the journalists employed by News of the World who hacked into phones of murder victims, soliders, and bombing victims, in attempts to attain a story to further themselves as journalists. In contrast, if the unethical investigative practices are committed under the umbrella of altruisim, for the benefit of the society, then these acts may be classified as justified. In the case of Anthony Weiner, the media investigated his private life and revealed to the American public the salacious text messages and pictures he posted on Twitter. Through this, the public was made aware of the conducts of their elected official and subsequently, immediate action was taken due to the mass disgust of citizens and Weiner resigned from his position as Senate.

 

thanks

 

You're welcome.

 

Thanks for clicking. Appreciated.

 

Adequate control of language.

Evidence of some clarity and depth of thought.

Ideas presented in a coherent manner.

 

Your examples are sufficient in supporting your arguments.

 

I feel this essay will be scored a:

JKLMNOP/QRST

[PastaInhaler]

-clicked-

 

Thanks Pasta!

 

Progress often complicates as much as it simplifies.

 

In the past century, the human race has seen more intellectual and technological changes then ever before. Indeed, this progress has changed the way that we interact with and understand the world in dramatic ways. Progress can be defined as change towards improvement, and it is synonymous with advancement. Sadly, this progress often complicates as much as it simplifies. As our scientific understanding has advanced, complicated new theories and projects have become prevalent. Take, for example, quantum theory. Quantum theory represents a huge advancement in the physical sciences, but the majority of the human population does not understand this theory because it is too complicated.

 

Examples of progress complicating as much as it simplifies can also be seen in the world of technology. For example, the personal computer is a very complicated piece of technology. Further, knowledge of how to operate a computer is becoming progressively more necessary in modern society. Indeed, the computer is now a necessary tool in communication, commerce, education and entertainment. For some members of society, the computer is too complicated to be used proficiently, and this has negatively impacted their lives. A lack of technical proficiency has led to complications and frustration. Indeed, sometimes progress, be it scientific or technological, can complicate as much as it simplifies.

 

Thankfully, progress can also lead to simplicity and ease. The car maker Lexus has recently released a new model of car that parallel parks for the driver at the flip of a button. Parallel parking is the bane of many drivers, and this feature can greatly simplify the parking process. This can reduce stress and save time. This technological progress makes a certain aspect of life easier rather than more complicated. Indeed, technological advancements can simplify life.

 

In some cases, progress complicates life, and in other cases, progress simplifies things. Whether progress leads to complications or simplifications can be determined by evaluating how technically challenging or mentally complex the required new process is. Quantum theory is mentally complex, so quantum theory is very complicated. The operation of a personal computer is a technically complex process, and as such, this technology has complicated the lives of some users. Lexus' new parallel parking feature is very simple to use, so this progress has served to simplify the lives of drivers. Regardless of metal complexity or technical challenge, new processes and theories can be learned and mastered. Until this mastery occurs, progress often complicates as much as it simplifies. Since progress is defined as change, the rate of mastery may never be able to keep speed with the rate of progress, and novel concepts and inventions may perpetually baffle some people.

 

You're welcome.

 

Thanks for clicking. Appreciated.

 

Adequate control of language.

Some issues with depth and complexity of thought.

Ideas are somewhat developed.

 

You will need to explore the second part of the prompt, "as much as it simplifies," in your first two paragraphs. You have failed to address what simplicity is being complicated by Quantum Theory, and the advent of personal computing. Your essay would be better served if you removed the Quantum Theory example, and explained more about what simplicity means, and its relationship with progress and complexity.

 

As well, there were issues in your exploration of task#2:

 

"Describe a specific situation in which progress might simplify more than it complicates."

You should explore the complexities of parallel parking a little bit more than merely referring to it as the "bane of many drivers." What is so bad (complicated) about parallel parking? Does it cause problems? Is it unnatural for most drivers, and causes frustration and bumper-to-bumper accidents? You can lead into your example by starting off with the complexities of parallel parking, and how Lexus addressed the issue (simplified it as well as added a level of complication). It will improve organization and depth in your essay. If you wanted to, you could add one more layer of depth by showing how there was a bit of added complication to the automated parallel parking technology such as keeping the sensors clean, or learning to use the new technology. Then within a short time, and with minimal practice, the technology could be used flawlessly (simplification).

 

I feel this essay will be scored an:

JKLMNOPQRST

[atesme]

-- clicked --

 

In education, the newest way is not always the best way.

 

Education is an area that deserves avid attention. The abilities of the next generation, and therefore, the future, depends on receiving an excellent education. However, it is generally agreed that we have not yet arrived at an optimal formula for guaranteeing the best possible education for our children. This area is still considered to be 'in progress' - that is, we are constantly trying out new improvements and hoping that they will be beneficial. For example, the Ontario school board has recently decided to completely eliminate calculus from its high school curriculum because universities in Ontario have complained about the uneveness in quality of education throughout the province. However, what the school board should have considered before making such a monumental decision is that universities - even provincial ones - are integrating centers. Students attending a single university come from a diverse mix of hometowns ranging across the country and even the world. Thus, eliminating calculus from the program in Ontario will put the residents of that province at a distinct disadvantage when compared to other students who come from areas that have not decided to make this move. Furthermore, while Ontario universities all currently offer an introductory calculus course that is generally mandatory for all B.Sc. students, its quality is questionable. Some students, those from the States in particular, have AP courses in calculus under their belts and consider these courses far too easy. Others have never been exposed to the subject and can be completely overwhelmed. The teaching of calculus should have been left to high schools, where a teacher could provide more personalized and patient attention than a professor could ever hope to offer. Thus, in this situation, a bold new move made by the Ontario school board has in fact degraded the quality of education that is received by its students.

 

However, new innovations are not always guaranteed to be detrimental. For example, in New York City there is a trend catching on of opening Charter Schools. These schools are publicly funded by privately run. They generally share space with pre-established public schools, but are considered separate. These Charter Schools are innovative in the sense that they are establishing new curriculums and methods of teaching that are more individualized because they do not have to cater to an entire state's worth of students. The Charter Schools have generally been successful; children who attend these schools tend to do better when tested compared to their public school peers. In this case, a new innovation has indeed led to a better quality of education because it provides more personalized care. Charter Schools, while still in their fledgling states, have substantial promise in the field of education in the future.

 

The deciding factor that determines whether or not a new innovation can benefit a student's education is very simple. It is generally almost universally agreed upon that any child will benefit from more time and attention. This is even more true when we are discussing the child's education - children who are in smaller classes, whose teachers may provide them with more care, generally do better. Thus, when a new innovation seeks to give each student more time and to make their educational experience more individualized, as is the case in Charter Schools that attempt to use different curriculums than their public school counterparts, the standard of education is raised. However, when an innovation forces students to learn under conditions that provide no personalized care or attention, such as pushing the education of calculus into university lecture halls that are for the most part extremely depersonalized, then educational quality is decreased. Any innovation should therefore seek first and foremost to give its students more individual care, because doing this is the only way to make progress towards creating a better education for our children.

[bored]

--clicked--

 

Businesses succeed by taking advantage of consumers' weaknesses.

 

An organization conducting business is an entity composed of workers working towards a similar goal. This goal usually involves making profit. How does entity achieve their goal? It does so usually by utilizing a consumer’s weakness. The tobacco industry for example is composed of many companies that all sell one thing. Their selling of cigarettes is how these companies survive and make profits. A cigarette contains compounds that are very addictive to the user. As soon as the user takes one, he or she needs another and another, and the user ends up spending $18 every day to buy cigarettes. The tobacco companies realize this very well that smoking is a weakness and they can make money off the users, and thus they sell these drugs legally.

 

The profit earned by these organizations is done so on a short term. As soon as the resources are depleted, so are those companies. And therefore, the model of taking advantage of the consumer’s weakness is not followed by modern organizations. Economists have come up with theories that explain how companies like International Business Machines (IBM) survive. IBM was once a company that started by selling type writers, they later moved on to making and selling computers and have disbanded it recently. They now provide networking solutions to other businesses. How and why does a company like IBM survive even though their resources are gone, whereas a tobacco company will be gone as soon as government laws are changed to the resources are depleted? IBM and other long last profit making companies believe in and use Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). A company can only survives in society because of the people in that society, so therefore the company is in dept to the society. CSR states that a company is responsible for the society in which it succeeds. Throughout history, IBM has been conducting programs for the society. These programs include donating money to research and innovation, or providing their equipment to be used by societies, or even giving money to charity organizations. By doing this, IBM keeps the society, the stakeholders and the shareholders happy. This keeps IBM shares up and they company out of bankruptcy. Like IBM, there are many companies that use CSR to stay active for many years, as opposed to tobacco companies which will just die out as soon as the resources are gone.

 

An organization can therefore succeed in two ways. One is by taking advantage of consumer weakness and than going bankrupt as soon as resources are scares, or they can use CSR to their advantage and induce shareholders to invest even more into the company. This way the company has enough money when it needs it the most and it can easily change its product.

[shaziberries]

Thank you for doing this... my MCATs in two days and I'm not sure where I stand in terms of my writing. Btw, ripple is such a cool site, thank you for opening it up to me, I'm going to be sure to contribute daily and encourage people to do the same. I just finished two prompts from AAMC 9

 

 

"The primary goal of every business should be to maximize profits"

 

A successful business is a well-oiled machine. It operates smoothly only as a result of its founders, employees, and consumers. The founders of a business provide the finances required to start it up, as well as formulate the mechanisms on which this business will run. Over time, hard-working employees allow for the business to expand its horizons and increasingly attract more customers. However, these employees need to be paid constantly, and the finances that were put forth initially by the founders need to be regenerated. Thus, a business cannot sell its products for the same mere price they cost to be made. Instead, the first and foremost goal of a business should be to maximize the profits generated from the sale of goods, and use these profits to maintain all the aspects that contribute to the businesses success. For example, Staples, a business that sells stationary and office supplies, is notorious for being one of the most expensive franchise stationary stores. However, its success across North America has proven that the profits it generates from selling, for example, a pen (worth 10 cents) for 4 dollars, are put to use effectively and contribute to the company's good fortune.

On the other hand, some businesses operate on an antithetical principle. They aim to minimize profits and advertise their non-profit status as an attractor for more business and to promote an image consistent with philanthropy. Businesses such as these are made for the purpose of helping others in need while maintaining selfless intentions. They run on the basis of donations from politicians, celebrities and the general public who want to abide by Gandhi's words and "be the change [they] want to see in the world". An example of such an organization would be UNICEF (The United Nations Children's Fund) which promotes children's rights to education, food, and survival. UNICEF helps children in developing countries by providing them with food, education, and health services free of charge. They pay for these services by using money generated by donation during nation-wide campaigns held, for example, during Halloween.

Thus, the factor that determines whether or not a business should aim to maximize profits lies in the business' purpose in society. The fact is, businesses need money to survive, just as people need food. Most businesses that provide services and products for the general public are reliant on profits to keep their business alive. However, If the business is founded on the grounds of helping those in need, then it can generate that money in ways other than gaining profit from its services, such as through donation. Such philanthropic organizations aim to do the opposite of most businesses: they aim to minimize profits.

 

"A politician's lifestyle should reflect his or her political views."

 

 

A politician should be able to not only talk the talk, but also walk the walk. Therefore, the ways in which a politician goes about his daily life should reflect on the political views in which he or she believes. As the pop group "The Black Eyed Peas" say in their hit song "Where is the Love", politicians should be asked the question, "Can you practice what you preach, or would you turn the other cheek?" A politician who puts on an image that promotes or puts down certain beliefs but doesn't act upon them is one who promotes a certain image, only with the intentions of usurping power. An example of a politician that actively demonstrates his political views in his daily life would be Gilles Duceppe, the former leader of the Canadian political party "Bloc Quebecois". His party promotes the separatist movement in Quebec that, if successful, would lead to Quebec being separate from Canada, and therefore its own country. Duceppe did not only promote this in his campaign speeches. Rather, he was often spotted in a number of rallies in Montreal as a protester actively fighting for his beliefs.

 

On the other hand, often a politicians views will be far too ideal for it to be possible for he or she to emulate such ideals in his or her lifestyle. For example, a politician who promotes conservation of the environment will still use his or her wealth to produce campaign materials that are made of inordinate amounts of paper and plastic. In doing so, he or she is promoting the use and waste of products derived from nature. Often, in order to maintain such a lifestyle, a politician simultaneously contributes to the very problems he or she is wishing to eradicate. An example would be the Green Party of Canada. While they promote the ecological and environmental awareness, they still participated in the past campaign with as many paper materials as the next candidate. However, in this situation, such a predicament is unavoidable because without all the materials that promote their political party, they would not gain the publicity and acclaim that they need in order to get their foot into door.

 

Therefore, politicians' lifestyles should be indicative of their political views, except in situations where their beliefs are too ideal to completely align with their lifestyle. In most situations, it is imperative that politicians "walk the walk" to avoid doubt from being cast upon them from the eyes of the general public. However, politicians tend to be tremendously aspirational and optimistic towards certain goals. This is a tendency that has led the developed world to prosper to the point to which it is at today. Yet, in such idealistic ambitions, one can not expect a politician to live his or her life precisely by the values he or she preaches.

 

 

THANK YOU!

[atesme]

--clicked---

Thanks a bunch!

 

Students should be more interested in the process of learning than in the facts learned.

 

One of the most important developments in a child's life is when he or she 'learns how to learn'. A person who has developed this essential skill early in life has a distinct advantage over others who have never had the chance to do so. This is because the good habits that enable one to learn efficiently and well - such as patience, dedication, a sense of duty towards completely one's work - can be applied later on in life during all levels of education. Thus, whilst learning how to add and how to read is very important in the first grade, a skill that is infinitely more valuable that is picked up at the same time is how to learn. Children who have not developed that skill tend to feel the strain as they venture into higher education. For example, I was one of the unlucky children who found elementary school to be easy. I almost always could finish my assigned work during class time, and almost never had to study after school. Well, upon entering high school and university, I have often found that I have to force myself - rather painfully - to hit the books. I never developed the habits that made studying second nature. Therefore, I understand how important it is for a child (or a child's parents) to focus on the progress of learning early on in life in order to help him or her acquire essential learning skills.

 

However, there comes a point in a person's life in which those skills are no longer taught - it is assumed that one has already developed them. This usually occurs around the end of high school, and especially in university. University is an institution which seeks, in the short span of four years, to cram as much information as possible into your brain. It hopes to fill the gap between the standardized education you recieved in high school and the specialized knowledge you will need when entering the work force. For example, a person who has decided to attend university to recieve a Bachelor's degree in Science may hope, one day, to go into scientific research. As such, he or she hopes that a higher education can prepare him or her; this preparation usually involves becoming extremely well versed in the current literature surrounding the area of study. In such a situation, most of the learning this person will undertake involves extensive reading and absorbing of information. This is not a time to 'develop good habits'; it is a time to learn about your specific field of interest. Therefore, in this period of life, one may expect to focus on the content of education much more than the progress.

 

Whether or not a student's education should center around absorbing information or around acquiring learning skills depends on the the level of education in which he or she is currently partaking. One of the most important things elementary school can help you achieve is the development of many basic life skills, including the ability to learn. The ability to learn is the foundation upon which all further education will rest, and as such needs to be built early in life. Later on, however, as one enters high school and university, the focus shifts towards adding to the structure that rests on your foundation. This structure consists of specific knowledge that applies to your personal field of study. Thus, we all need to remember to construct the foundation before the building, and realize that are specific periods of life that are appropriate for specific areas of learning.

[ameltingbanana]

-clicked-

 

thanks again!

 

 

Citizens who enjoy a country’s benefits during peacetime have a responsibility to support their nation in times of war.

 

Wartime is characterized by more than a simple, legalistic definition of a country's leaders declaring war on another state. It affects all aspects of the country going to war, including its inhabitants. The citizens of a nation have a moral obligation, for the most part, to support and stand behind their government in times of war. It would be hypocritical to proclaim support for their nation in times of plenty only to abandon such sentiments when danger arises. As a citizen or inhabitant of a nation, for the most part, the government requires and needs your support in order to maintain a successful wartime campaign against a looming threat. When Europe was overrun by Germany's nigh-unstoppable march during the beginning of World War II, Britain held out as a bastion of Allied strength. Its citizens obeyed the air raid sirens, warnings and rations that were necessary as a result of brutal German campaigns such as the Blitz by Hitler's Luftwaffe. The citizens understood that a threat to their very way of living and survival had arisen, and stood behind Winston Churchill in defiance of the burgeoning Third Reich.

 

However, this rule is not carved in stone. Take, for instance, the recent NATO, and by extension, Canadian involvement in the Libyan conflict. Many citizens do not support the authorization of direct use of Canadian force against Colonel Gaddafi's troops. The simple reason is this: the Libyans are not threatening Canada directly, and do not directly affect Canada's affairs. While some may see this as an isolationist approach, it is a valid viewpoint. If the Libyans have not threatened Canada or declared war, what right do the Canadians have to aid in bombing runs across the Libyan deserts? The motivation behind the Canadian involvement is not the result of a threat to the Canadian people, it is in light of a contractual obligation to NATO - as a result, the government cannot claim that its citizens have a responsibility to support their warlike actions.

 

These two situations differ, then, in one critical aspect: harm to the native citizens. The motivation of Britain's defiance against Hitler stemmed from the most basic of human desires: to survive. It stands to reason the British citizens should support the wartime effort - to not do so would be fighting against their own survival and propagation. The motivation behind Canada's use of force against Libya stems, on the other hand, from a contractual military obligation. Canadian citizens are not obligated to back their government in this war endeavor, as Libya has in no way directly harmed or threatened to encroach upon Canadian lifestyles and borders. The basis for popular support in wartime can be directly linked to the desire for survival, then - if your nation's citizens are directly threatened by the war, they have a responsibility to support you, as you are fighting for their well-being.

[ameltingbanana]

And here's another one; -clicked- three times, since i'm kinda unloading two essays in a row here. Thanks again!

 

 

In business, competition is superior to cooperation.

 

 

The success of a business is contingent on numerous factors, but none are as prevalent as the need to be competitive. Competition breeds a culture of innovation, in which consumers are able to vote with their wallets as to what businesses they would like to see succeed. In such an environment, businesses failing to remain competitive will be quickly driven out of business. For example, Blockbuster Canada recently began liquidating a large number of its stores across the country, and to that end, video rental outfits across North America have been experiencing decreased profits and consumer patronage. In the face of elegant, simple, but highly profitable digital businesses like Netflix and Redbox, these outfits are unable to stay competitive with their physical media, as Netflix is innovating and offering a superior product to theirs. The success of Netflix far outstrips the rental businesses, then, due to its competitive nature, which in turn, garners votes from the wallets of increasingly numerous consumers and patrons.

 

Though competition is crucial, it can pale in the face of a powerful alliance between entities in the business world. BestBuy Electronics, a US consumer electronics giant, acquired FutureShop, a Canadian electronics giant, a few years ago. Competition between FutureShop and BestBuy would have been futile, as BestBuy possessed much more assets and resources than the Canadian electronics outfit. Many speculated that BestBuy would slowly, but surely convert FutureShop locations into BestBuy stores. However, rather than that, BestBuy chose to retain much of FutureShop's command structure and model the stores as a cooperative business model. FutureShop typically stores higher end electronics, with less selection, while BestBuy stores mostly midrange electronics, with more selection. The result is an elegant cooperative effort between the two stores to generate maximized profits for the parent company. If you want something like the latest 3DTV, go to FutureShop, or if you're just looking for a simple auxilliary cable, head to BestBuy. As a result, FutureShop remains profitable due to its merchandise niche, as does BestBuy by a different product niche.

 

What, then, was the reason for the difference in business strategies in these two cases? The answer is the type of market they cater to. The home movie market has been traditionally dominated by DVD, but with the arrival of digital alternatives from services like Netflix, the entire physical medium of DVD is being phased out by Netflix's competitive business model, which advocates cheap Internet-based streaming of entertainment. However, the success of a business in the consumer electronics market is not so heavily dependent on a single variable, which is why BestBuy and FutureShop have been able to highlight and sell their individual variables in a mutualistic relationship, with the profits still flowing into the same body's coffers. This clearly demonstrates one of the issues businesses face to stay successful - a strategy for demonstrating revenue may be advantageous in one market but not in another.

[BehindTheWheel]

-Clicked-

Thank you for your help! I have been working on my writing a little more, hopefully it improved a bit.

P.S. In your opinion, do you think that more "general" examples hinder the essay score ?

--------------------------------------------------------

 

The public's right to know must sometimes take precedence over an individual's right to privacy.

Describe a specific situation in which an individual's right to privacy might justifiable take precedence over the public's right to know. Discuss what you think determines when the public's right to know is more important than the individual's right to privacy.

 

Information can be used in a variety of ways, but its’ main purpose is to ensure human safety. The public is a group of people who live in proximity of one another and function as a social order. They have a right to information that will ensure that their lives are not in any danger. This information can be personal in nature and making it publicly available would infringe on a single person’s social freedoms, such as their right to confidentiality. This is demonstrated by the example of criminals who have been convicted of sex crimes such as pedophilia and sexual assaults. Aside from having a criminal record these people have to be also registered with the sex registry, whereby the police can monitor their location and activities. For instance, a person who has been convicted for pedophilia cannot have any toys in their apartment. The police have the right to search the home of these individuals to ensure that there are not toys in their homes. Moreover, in the United States of America the location of registered sex offenders is available to the public. This information allows people to take appropriate precautions in order to ensure that safety is maintained for them and their family. As a result, the public’s right to know takes precedence over an ex-convict’s right to privacy.

 

However, there are instances when an individual’s right to privacy might be justifiable. For instance, people who are part of the witness protection program are allowed to hide their true identity from the public in order to protect themselves and their families. Since these people have witnessed crimes that may have been committed by a criminal organization their testimony may result in the conviction of several individuals that took part in long lasting crimes such as human trafficking. However, criminal organizations have far-reaching capabilities in their funding and available personnel in order to prevent key witnesses from testifying against them. This would make a weaker case for the prosecution and ensure exoneration. A witness’ privacy is important in this case because any information that may be available to the public or members of the public can be leaked and fall in the hands of individuals who are part of the criminal network. As a result, not only will the witness’ life be endangered but so will the public’s safety, as the criminals will be allowed to continue illegal activities.

 

In order to determine whether a public’s right to privacy is more important than the individual’s right to privacy, one must consider the effect of information on society. In the case of registered sex offenders it is important that the public has the information about people who have been convicted of sex crimes in order to ensure their personal safety. However, in the case of witness protection program it is important to note that the witness’ right to privacy is important to ensure their own safety and to ensure that the criminals they are testifying against are brought to justice, which will subsequently prevent these criminals from harming the public. As a result, knowledge and confidentiality can both be important in order to ensure the safety of society.

[Grey's Anatomy]

-clicked-

 

Education comes not from books but from practical experience.

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 books might educate students better than practical experience. Discuss what you think determines when practical experience provides a better education than books do.

 

As humans, individuals have an innate desire for knowledge and curiosity to understand the world in which they live. Education exists in several forms, such as facts, skills and values. In school, we read and learn from books in order to grasp a better understanding of the basic principles of the subject we are studying. In the practical world, we learn from experience and by engaging in hands-on activities. Both forms of education are valuable; however, it is also important to consider the circumstance in order to assess which method may educate students better and more effectively.

 

Learning from practical experience is a valuable tool in society, as we strive to explore and expand our understanding of the workings of the world. In the process of discovery, we often learn new information that has not been recorded before. In this context, practical experience teaches something that books cannot - new knowledge and skills. For example, during the initial stages of HIV research, there were many questions that needed to be answered, and only through practical experience were we able to learn and enhance our understanding. We came to understand the way in which HIV infects patients and deteriorates their health over time. Such knowledge could not have been found in books, since we have never been in a battle against such a deadly and perpetually-mutant virus. As a result, in the process of new discovery, students learn better from practical experience than any knowledge books can provide.

 

Conversely, considering certain circumstances, books might educate students better than practical experience. Often, we try to learn from our past for various reasons, which include avoiding repeating the same mistakes, or simply to appreciate culture and history. For example, learning about the lifestyle of seminal personalities in history teaches students not only about our history, but also to be inquisitive. The knowledge gained from books in this context cannot be acquired from practical experience as we are learning about the past. For example, students can learn significantly about the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s by reading about Martin Luther King Jr. Additionally, this knowledge is transferable in a practical setting, suggesting that education from books and practical experience often go hand-in-hand.

 

In conclusion, education can be gained both from books as well as from practical experience. Examining the circumstance will allow us to determine whether books or practical experience may educate students better. When we are examining and scrutinizing our current understanding of the world in order to expand the knowledge domain, we benefit greatly from practical experience. This is particularly important when we are facing a challenge or embarking upon a journey that has never been explored before. In other words, the knowledge accessible through books may be limited; hence, practical experience may educate students better than books. In contrast, we can gain significant knowledge from books regarding our history in order to learn from past events, influential personalities, and mistakes. Such knowledge is valuable as it allows us to appreciate our past and the struggles we have faced.

 

Thanks!

[Grey's Anatomy]

-clicked-

 

Developed nations have an obligation to provide aid to the underdeveloped nations of the world.

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 a developed nation might not be obligated to provide aid to an underdeveloped nation. Discuss what you think determines when developed nations have an obligation to provide aid to underdeveloped nations

 

 

As citizens of a developed country, we often enjoy privileges and rights that remain to be dreams of many impoverished people around the world. Global health and providing aid to underdeveloped nations seems to be a tremendous challenge for many parts of the developed world, requiring the investment and utilization of a plethora of resources and money. As a result, it is important to consider when developed nations may have an obligation to provide aid, and under which circumstances provision of aid may be not be our responsibility.

 

Many developing countries face challenges around income, nutrition, shelter, and health care, all of which serve as basic necessities for survival. When an underdeveloped nation encounters an unexpected catastrophe, millions of people are inflicted with significant pain and suffering. For example, during a natural disaster, unstable economies often find it challenging to be able to restore the nation to its previously-struggling condition. A developing nation that is already burdened with economic and political crises will find it nearly impossible to reconstruct a nation and serve its citizens. In this context, developed nations have an obligation to provide aid in order to bring nations out of helplessness. For instance, Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) is Canada's deployable team of health care providers and engineers that provide emergency aid to disaster-stricken nations. In 2005, when Pakistan encountered a 7.6 magnitude earthquake in Kashmir, DART provided medical care to thousands of individuals as well as provided half a million litres of fresh water. In this situation, Pakistan was struck by a severe catastrophe, leaving many people homeless and helpless. Hence, developed nations were obligated to provide support to restore the country from the damages.

 

Conversely, there are circumstances when developed nations might not be obligated to provide aid to an underdeveloped nation. Annually, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation spends billions of dollars in research and development in the fight against malaria, HIV/AIDS, and tuberculosis. Given the limited resources that are available, it is a challenge to spend such a significant amount of money on providing constant aid. The actions of the organization may be considered moral, valuable and beneficial, but it is arguably not an obligation to use a nation's resources to provide aid when a developing nation may be relatively stable. Even if a developing nation is not prosperous, it is not realistic to expect all nations of the world to be entirely developed, considering the limited resources available. As a result, when a nation is not struck with an emergency that requires immediate relief, as in the case of a natural disaster, developed nations may not be obligated to provide aid to underdeveloped nations.

 

In conclusion, developed nations spend billions of dollars annually on improving the living conditions of millions of individuals worldwide, by means of health care and nutrition. However, an effective allocation of limited resources is an important consideration. When underdeveloped nations are faced with a catastrophe that renders a nation unstable and helpless, prosperous and developed nations are obligated to provide aid and resources to help those who are vulnerable and powerless in such a situation. However, when a nation is fairly stable, even if not developed and prosperous, developed nations may not be obligated to provide continuous aid and resources from their own nation to improve the living conditions of individuals in another nation. As a result, aid is obligatory when nations are helpless and unstable, while developed nations may not be responsible for providing continuous aid to underdeveloped nations when they are fairly stable.

 

Thank you once again!

[frozenarbitor]

clicked.

Thanks!

_____

Technology designed to make our lives simpler often turns out instead to make our lives more complicated.

 

Describe a specific situation in which a new technology might not make our lives more complicated. Discuss what you think determines whether a new technology simplifies or complicates our lives.

 

 

 

As the old adage says, “necessity is the mother of all inventions.” Throughout history, humans have been constantly coming up with ideas that serves to our needs. Technology are often designed with the aim to simplify a process or to make possible a previously unachievable work. However, the solution to an old problem often comes with new problems. Indeed, technologies designed to solve a problem in our society often gives us more troubles than it solves, making our lifes more complicate than before. For example, cars are technologies invented to make our lifes simpler by reducing the time it takes for transportation. However, the millions of tons of fossil fuel we burn to power our vehicles and the greenhouse gases produced are contributing to the dire global warming problem we face today. With global climate change and rising sea level, the new problem of global warming challenges the survival of human race on Earth and is a much more complicated problem for human to deal with than transportation. Therefore, technologies such as the vehicles we designed to utilize fossil fuel to speed up our transportation creates more complicated problems to the society than it solves.

 

 

It may be true that technologies often creates more problems than it solves for our society. However, for individuals, technology ususally makes our lives much simpler. The creation of the internet may be argued that it creates more problems to the society than it solves, but the internet doubtlessly makes individual lives much more convinient. With internet, a person in North America may send emails to another in China with a click of a mouse rather than having to wait for months for the message to be delivered in mail over the sea. The internet also allow students to find information much more rapidly using a search engine such as Google than having to go through millions of archives in a library. Consumers may use the internet to buy items online or watch their favorite movie without having to leave their house. Thus, the internet, amongst many others that are used by individuals, makes the lives of individuals simpler by speeding up and simplifying more lengthy and complicated but nervertheless necessary processes of our lives.

 

 

What determines whether a technology can make our lives simpler or more complicated depends on the scale we consider. At a larger scale of the society as a whole, technologies that are designed to solve a problem often creates new problems that are more complicated and more difficult to solve than the one being addressed. The technology designed to exploit the energy of fossil fuels to power cars for transportation creates the more serious and complicated problem of global warming that humanity now face. At a smaller scale of an individual, technology often makes one’s life simpler by simplifying and accelerating a necessary process in life. Computers, the internet, or cars, amongst many others, all make our lives easier and simpler by feeding to our needs. Therefore, technologies often make individual lives simpler at a smaller scale while tend to make things more complicate at a larger scale for the society.

[PastaInhaler]

-clicked- (by the way, Ripple is awesome)

 

Television turns even the most significant events into entertainment.

 

 

Television is watched by people all over the world. The different types of programming that are available today are extensive. From documentaries to reality television to daytime soap operas, we can get a lot of satisfaction from watching TV. However, one of the most important things that television offers us today is the 6 o’clock news. For the most part, news broadcasts are intended to keep the general public informed about the different events that are occurring in the world. However, oftentimes television tries to put a spin on the news. They want to make the news seem like an interesting story, because then we will be more likely to watch it for entertainment as well as for information. For example, the recent wedding of Prince William and Kate is, of course, newsworthy. It is natural that people all around the world should want to know about the nupitals. However, television broadcasts take that interest to a new level, giving us intricate details of Kate’s dress, telling us about her ring, and even showing footage of the wedding ceremony. In fact, I remember hankering down with a group of friends one evening eating chips and watching broadcasts of the royal wedding. In this case, television has taken interest in this event to another level. The coverage for the wedding was definitely more for entertainment’s sake than for information’s.

 

Whilst watching Will and Kate tie the knot was definitely fun, there are some events that television stations simply cannot make entertaining, regardless of how much explicit footage they show. This is due to the nature of the event. Nobody, for example, enjoyed watching footage of the 9/11 attacks. Although we were all glued to our television screens for a good week following the bombing, the reason for tuning into the news stations over and over again was not for enjoyment. Rather, we wanted information. We wanted to know what had happened, what was going to happen, what the government was going to do about it, whether there was any more danger… etc. Here, television provided us with a channel of information, and it was seized onto solely for that reason. Nobody lounged around in front of the TV with a bucket of popcorn watching the 9/11 attacks. It was simply not the kind of news with which one could do such a thing. It was too depressing, too scary, too shockingly uncomfortable to think about.

 

The determining factor which allows us to watch a news show for fun as well as for information is embedded in the nature of the story. If we are watching the reporter speak about a light hearted event, one that we are happy to hear has happened, then extensive coverage of the event has the ability to turn a news story into a television sensation. This is why we all watched the royal wedding with such avid attention. If, however, the event to speak of is one that shocks, horrifies, and makes us feel naturally uncomfortable and unhappy, then no amount of reporting will be able to dull that feeling and wake in us an enjoyment for watching the horrors unfold on the screen. Rather, in such a situation we watch the television with anxiety, hoping minute by minute to hear of good news. In conclusion, while television reporting might try to turn news into entertainment in order to garner more viewership, it can only be successful with certain kinds of stories.

 

Thanks for clicking. Appreciated.

 

Adequate control of language.

The essay shows some clarity of thought, but may lack complexity.

Evidence of some depth.

 

Your examples are sufficient in supporting your arguments.

 

I feel this essay will be scored an:

JKLMNO/PQRST

[PastaInhaler]

-Clicked-

 

 

People’s first priority should be financial security.

 

In modern society, money plays a huge role. It is commonly believed that money makes the world go around. Thus, it is important for an individual to consider financial security as his/her first priority. The term financial security is used to refer to a state of economic stability on an individual level. More specifically, an individual is said to be financially secure when he/she has acquired a decent amount of money for future use (savings for retirement, children's education, future purchases etc), is not in debt and has a secure job to ensure a steady flow of income on a regular basis. More specifically, financial security should be the first priority for adults since they are considered to be old enough to work and to make appropriate decisions. For example, if an adult wishes to establish a family, it is very important that he/she is financially secure. Having a family and possibly becoming a parent places huge responsibilties on the individual. He/she is considered to be responsible to care for the children and to ensure that their needs are being met. As such, an adult is responsible for himself/herself as well as the dependents. In this situations, financial security should be the first priority.

 

In contrast, financial security should not be the first priority for children and youth under the age of 18 since they are not considered to be old enough to work or to be able to make appropriate decisions. For example, for an individual under the age of 18, the first priority should be school and family instead of financial security. It is the responsibility of the parents and caregivers to provide for children and to ensure that their needs are being met. As such, it is not necessary for a child or youth to view financial security as their first priority. It is also important to note that when an individual is under tha age of 18, they are not resonsible for caring for themselves or for others. Thus, it is not necessary for them to view financial security is being one of significant importance.

 

In conclusion, financial security should be the first priority for adults since they are considered to be old enough to work and to make appropriate decisions. They are also thought to be responsible for themselves and for any dependents they may have. In contrast, financial security should not be the first priority for children and youth under the age of 18. In most societies, such individuals are not considered to be old enough to be capable to work or to be able to make appropriate decisions. They are also not considered to be resposible for caring for themselves or for others. Thus, financial security does not need to be their first priority.

 

Thanks PastaInhaler!

 

P.S. I wasn't sure what kind of examples to use in such a prompt as it seems too vague and no particular/specific example comes to mind. Any feedback regarding that would be much appreciated. Thanks!

 

You're welcome.

 

Thanks for clicking. Appreciated.

 

Adequate control of language.

Some issues with depth and complexity of thought.

Ideas are somewhat developed.

 

For the second example, you should explore the ideas of school and family.

Make sure that when you write about school that you de-emphasize acquiring an education to make money. What is a young person's duty to family?

 

I feel this essay will be scored a:

JKLMNOPQRST

 

If you are able to use more concrete examples, it would make your essay more compelling. You could easily write that the Computer Engineering students at U of T are in the program to ultimately get a good career and make money. Students go into law school to become lawyers, but not just that, to be able to land a career that pays well when they are done. Having a job that pays well will ensure financial security.

 

The counter-example may be harder to come by, but you could just mention students from the high school, or grade school that you went to and go from there.

[PastaInhaler]

-Clicked-

 

Successful politicians are ones that are motivated more by practical considerations than moral values.

 

Politicians consist of individuals that have either been voted, selected or appointed to their given position by the citizens or another governing party/official. In most democratic societies, the duty of the politician is to serve as the voice for the people. A politician is one who is a great leader that is able to lead the country forward in time of peace as well as during times of war or other crisis. More specifically, success of a politician greatly relies on their ability to lead the country forward during the times of crisis. Thus, during such times, it is important for a politician to be motivated more by practical concerns rather than by moral values. For example, President of the United States, Barack Obama came into power after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack on the country. In order for him to be successful, he needs to be able to consider the concerns of the citizens of the United States and continue the efforts to fight terrorism in order to ensure that such an event does not repeat itself. In the light of practical concerns for national security and for answers to the events that happened in the past (i.e. 9/11 attack), President Obama had to make the decision to send the American army to Pakistan in search for Osama Bin Laden, the mastermind behind the terrorist attacks. Osama Bin Laden was found in Pakistan and was killed by the American army. Moral values would normally prevent one to take such a decision of killing another human being. However, in this situation where the national security, justice and peace for a huge group of individuals is involved, practical considerations play an important role in a politicians' decision making process. This accomplishment made under the government led by President Obama will serve a very important role in his continued success.

 

In contrast, it is not always necessary for a successful politician to be motivated more by practical considerations. A successful politician can also be motivated by moral values. For example, Mahatma Gandhi was involved in the uprising of politics in India during the time of the British Rule. Practical considerations to attain freedom for the nation as a whole were important, however, Mahatma Gandhi made his efforts based on moral values. He used the route of non-violence to get his point accross to the British Empire and was greatly successful. In 1947, his non-violent protests against the British Empire played a major role in the independance of India. This illustrates that his success was primarily driven by motivation due to moral values. Note that in this case, India was not under threat to its national security and the lives of thousands of people was not explicitly at stake. Citizens of India were being suppressed and were not free to make their own decisions. Hence, this is not considered as a situation of war or crisis.

 

In conclusion, some politicians that have been successful at their jobs are greatly motivated by practical consideration rather than by moral values. This is especially the case during wartime or times of crisis where practical considerations with regards to the safety of the citizens and overall national security are of utmost importance. Such concerns can lead a politician to make tough decisions that moral values would otherwise not allow. Moreover, it is important to note that the success of a politician is heavily dependant upon the way in which he/she leads the country through the tough time, such as those seen during a war or times of crisis. During the time of crisis, it is important for a politician to be motivated by practical concerns. This was clearly illustrated by the example of President Barack Obama making th tough decisions to send the American Army in search of terrorist Osama Bin Laden who was later executed during this effort. On the other hand, it is possible for a successful politician to be motivated by moral values such as that illustrated in the case of Mahatma Gandhi. He became successful by being motivated by his moral values and followed a route of non-violence during the fight for independance in India. Moral values can play a major role when there is no explicit threat to the safety of the citizens of a given nation such as those seen in India in the 1940's.

 

Thanks!

 

You're welcome.

 

Thanks for clicking. Appreciated.

 

Adequate control of language.

Ideas are well developed.

Evidence of clarity, depth, and complexity of thought.

Demonstrates proficiency in responding to the tasks.

 

I feel this essay will be scored a:

JKLMNOPQ/RST

[ameltingbanana]

-clicked-

Thanks.

 

Education comes not from books but from practical experience.

 

The process of educating someone for a task is complicated, with multiple approaches available for a student's learning. Often, a practical or hands-on method of teaching will produce more successful and enlightened students than a theoretical approach. Consider Student A, who excels in learning through spatial means. Skilled with her hands, she is obviously full of Gardner's spatial intelligence traits. To maximize the quality and efficiency of her education, then a theoretical approach will not do - she is used to a hands-on approach, and will learn better in that manner. She remembers and learns from actually performing tasks, not seeing them in text on a set of notes or in a textbook. These may as well be wasted on her with respect to practical assignments, because she simply is not maximized in Gardner's linguistic trait (which denotes high verbal and textual recall).

 

The practical method is not without its shortfalls, however. for example, Student B, who can be considered an antithesis to Student A, learns best through reading and looking at diagrams rather than being made to manipulate objects and perform practical assignments. He is lacking in Gardner's spatial intelligence, but demonstrates high amounts of Gardner's linguistic basic intelligence. He has excellent memory, and textual recall comes to him as easily as does the hands-on approach for Student A. Student B, then, would benefit from a textbook education, as it would make the best use of his mental faculties and maximize his efficiency while learning.

 

What makes education for those two hypothetical students so different, so that they might learn similar material through different avenues? The answer is their innate learning style. A practical education suits Student A's learning abilities and encourages her to wield and develop the strongest of her intelligences, the spatial sense. Conversely, a book-oriented or theoretical approach to education will allow Student B to make use of his linguistic and verbal recall skills. Education has a duty to the students to allow them to learn in the style they feel most comfortable - the varying efficiencies of theoretical and practical education according to their context are testaments to this.

[ameltingbanana]

-clicked-

and another one, haha. Thanks again

 

Developed nations have an obligation to provide aid to the underdeveloped nations of the world.

 

 

The term "underdeveloped nation" refers primarily to third-world nations, characterized by lower living standards and GDP while the term "developed nation" refers to first-world nations, characterized by higher living standards and GDP. It is commonplace, even expected that the latter should bestow aid to the former, in the form of financial, disaster and humanitarian relief. A nation like Rwanda, victim of a horrible genocide, but finally able to get back on her feet and make decisions leading to a prosperous future requires such aid from states like Canada, the EU and the USA. To NOT provide aid in such an instance would prolong instability in the nation and its newly erected moderate government. Such instability could result in another massacre, leading Rwanda further away from its goals of stability and prosperity. The government has openly asked for aid and has a plan for using it - it would be churlish and cruel of these developed Western nations not to provide it.

 

 

 

However, aid, while essential, is not a right. Some underdeveloped states require aid, but developed nations are under no obligation to provide it to them. Consider North Korea, a militant communist state with a one-party government led by Kim Jong-il. Party Leader Jong-il refuses to hold peace talks with other nations with which it has hostile relations and pursues a nuclear program when most of the world's nations are slowly dismantling their own nuclear arms. He funds these programs by steering money away from social assistance and agricultural support, generating artificial famines in cities and the countryside. The estimates of hunger casualties reach into the millions, and anecdotes of cannibalism due to food shortages have sprung up. Clearly, North Korea requires aid. But if such aid is provided by developed nations, these donors have no way of ensuring that Kim Jong-il will use this monetary advantage for appeasing food shortages - it may simply be wired into the nuclear program or military budgets. A state like this is focused on military theatre - not the welfare of its citizens.

 

 

 

It may seem strange, that one of these nations is entitled to humanitarian relief from the first-world while the other is not. But the factor differentiating them is a simple one: the long term goals and attitudes of their governments. One hopes to rise out of the difficulties and hardships of the third-world and become a prosperous, forward nation. The other has seemingly minimal concern for its citizens and is striving for military dominance. The former is entitled to aid because the Western donors can be reasonably sure that the money and resources they send is going where it needs to go. The same cannot be said with the same degree of confidence for the latter. Indeed, a state like North Korea, openly hostile to the US and South Korea, would be unlikely to even allow an audit by donor nations in the event of aid being sent. Thus, while aid is essential to the rise of third-world nations and the well-being of their citizens, the disposition and agenda of their incumbent governments may prove to be a catalyst or obstacle to the entitlement of such relief.

[BehindTheWheel]

-clicked-

Thanks!

A good movie usually teaches a moral lesson.

Describe a specific situation in which a good movie might not teach a moral lesson. Discuss what you think determines whether or not the quality of a movie depends upon its ability to teach a moral lesson.

 

A good movie is a motion picture that has an emotional impact on the audience by delivering a message. Usually that message is a moral lesson that teaches the audience to re-evaluate their values and develop decency. For instance, Casablanca was a movie that was released in 1942. It has won the best motion picture award at the Oscars and has been regarded as the best movie in the last 100 years by the American Film Institute. Casablanca tells a story of Rick, played by Humphrey Bogart, who meets his lover Ilsa, played by Ingrid Bergman, during the start of World War II. Despite both characters being madly in love, Ilsa suddenly leaves Rick when she finds out her husband, who she thought was killed by the Nazis, is still alive. Later, she and her husband encounter Rick in the Moroccan City of Casablanca. Despite the fact that both Ilsa and Rick are still madly in love, Rick sacrifices his relationship in order to help her husband, a resistance leader for the Allied forces. The ending of the movie was very unique and original because throughout the movie Rick did not act as a patriot and he did not want to be involved in the war. However, his final actions were those of a true patriot, he gave up his love in order to help resistance fight the Nazi forces. As a result, this highly regarded movie by the critics and audiences alike, taught the moral lesson of sacrificing one’s personal happiness in order to help the greater good.

 

However, there are good movies that do not teach moral lessons. For instance, Pulp Fiction was released in 1994 and did not teach a moral lesson at all. In fact, this movie’s story about criminal organizations did not seem to have any purpose to it at all. However, what made this movie so enjoyable was the way the story was presented. The movie began with a fragment from the end of the plot and continued to play backwards to the beginning of the plot. The non-traditional sequence of the film made this movie very unique. The American movie industry professionals have recognized the originality of the movie and it has won the Oscar for the best picture of the year. Thus, a good movie does not always teach a moral lesson.

 

In order to determine whether or not the quality of a movie depends upon its ability to teach a moral lesson one must look at the originality of the movie. In case of Casablanca, the movie was original because it presented an unexpected ending to the audience. The viewer did not think that Rick was capable of giving up Ilsa in order to help the resistance. Thus, the moral lesson taught in this movie makes it unique because it unexpectedly comes from Rick. However, in the case of Pulp Fiction, the movie was unique in how it presented the plot and challenged the way viewers expect storylines to be presented to them. In this case, it was not the moral lesson that made the movie original. Overall, the presence of uniqueness and originality determines the quality of a movie.

[PastaInhaler]

-Clicked-

 

In politics, money equals power.

 

Describe a specific political situation in which money might not equal power. Discuss what you think determines when money equals power in politics and when it does not.

 

It is the nature of politics to force individuals to compete with each other. Before an individual is elected to a political position, they must organize and undergo extensive political campaigns to in an attempt to persuade the public to vote for them. Often, these campaigns are viewed as expensive promotions which may or may not provide a return on their original investment. Political victors are often those individuals with the most elaborate campaigns. Therefore, money affords power to these individuals because they will be able to fund such campaigns. For example, following the 2011 conservative victory in the Canadian federal election it was found that they spent nearly $100 million on their political campaign. This amount was nearly double that of the liberals and quadruple that of independent political parties. Political analysts attributed the conservative victory to their extensive campaigning. These campaigns helped enhance the presence of the conservatives within Canadian neighborhoods and help dilute the presence of rivaling political parties.

 

Conversely, there are situations during which money does not afford power. Such situations typically arise when a political party or a politician has already been elected. For example, prior to entering politics Arnold Schwarzenegger was a successful movie star earning a multimillion dollar paycheck. In the early 2000’s Arnold became governor of California. By the nature of this position, this afforded him only the ability to influence state policy. On the other hand Barack Obama, the president of the United States, earns a salary of $400,000 but is commander in chief and has much more political power than governor Schwarzenegger. This is because the position of president affords him with greater privileges and power than the position of governor. Therefore, despite earning more money than Barack Obama, Arnold Schwarzenegger has less political power due to the nature of his political position.

 

Consequently, in politics, money only affords power under certain circumstances. If a political party is in direct competition with rivaling parties during a political election, the party with the most money will often come out victorious. This was seen during the 2011 Federal Canadian election when the wealthy conservative party was able to conduct elaborate political campaigns to influence the opinion of the general public. However, if an individual has already been elected, their political position grants them power. Even though Arnold Schwarzenegger is a multimillionaire, he has less influence than President Barack Obama because the position of governor affords less political power than the position of president.

 

Thanks for clicking. Appreciated.

 

Adequate control of language.

Some issues with depth of thought and integration.

Ideas are somewhat developed.

 

Task#1 was sufficient, but there were issues with putting ideas together in task#2. The line of reasoning you started with in task#1 took a bit of a turn in a different direction in task#2. It would seem that your examples in task#2 could easily be turned around to support the prompt. Arnold Schwarzenegger probably would not have been voted into governor without his fame and fortune. And even then he would have a lot of political connections because of his fortune. It would be best to pick another example or take a whole other approach to your argument. Also, think along the lines of why Bill Gates may not have a lot of power if he went into politics. What is he lacking?

 

I feel this essay will be scored an:

JKLMNOPQRST

[PastaInhaler]

-clicked-

 

I did this in during the aamc practice exam 3R. First practice run, time limits on and such.

 

An understanding of the past is necessary for solving problems of the present.

 

 

Humans are often victim to their past mistakes. To make a mistake should be to learn from it. After making the mistake of delegalization of alcohol in the United States, it is now understood the financial consequences as well as resource wastage in making drugs illegal. It is because of this knowledge of the past that we are now able to begin to understand why the legalization of marijuana may be useful in increasing resources as well as lost money through legalized sales of marijuana. Through history this is usually how we have come to make increasingly intelligent decisions. This is seen through building homes with certain materials and upon finding that a particular form of wood is not insulating enough, it is learned that a new wood form must be used in order to provide further insulation to the home. It is through these past mistakes and understanding why something has happened that one is able to to solve a future problem.

 

Yet, understanding the past is not exclusively the only way to solve a current or future problem. This is evident through the use of effective critical analysis and decision-making. When presented with a problem, it is often wise and prudent to develop a list of avenues to approach the problem. Upon examination of each of these choices, it would become increasingly evident that some of these my not be feasible due to a lack of money or lack of resources. From these possible remaining choices, you would be able to sample each of the solutions. From the pilot trial of choices, then choose the one that would be the best solution. This process is rather efficient, yet does not require any previous knowledge of the past. This process is evident in looking at the problem of a lack of personal transportation to and from work, with possible choices including several vehicles, public transit and a bicycle.

 

The past does need to be understood in certain circumstances in order to make intelligent decisions regarding future problems. The evidence of this is clear throughout many points of history, including the delegalization of alcohol and the current issue in legalizing marijuana. It is also the case that to solve a problem, you do not need to know the past. Human inspiration may serve to show the solution to a problem, just as decision-making skills and critical analysis may lead to a solution as well, evidenced through personal choice in transportation. It is known, however, that in knowing you couldn't afford payments for your previous car, that purchasing a new vehicle may not be an appropriate solution to the problem. This case is evidence that while understanding the past is not entirely necessary to solve a future problem, it will often lead to a more educated decision than without that knowledge.

 

Thanks for clicking. Appreciated.

 

Adequate control of language.

Problems with clarity of thought, depth, and complexity.

Problems with organization and coherence.

 

For task#2, you failed to completely complete what was required:

Describe a specific situation in which solving a current problem might not require an understanding of the past.

 

You must somehow refer to past events, and how they would not be applicable. It is also useful to mention the example early on and take time to explain it fully.

 

For instance: "In the early 1900s, modes of transportation were limited to but a few options. Unlike modern day, selections in forms of transportation were quite limited, with only a few major forms: walking, horse-drawn carriages and travel by train. An understanding of the few forms of transportation that were available in the past may not be entirely relevant in the current discussion. The main issue is one that concerns the vast array of transportation that is available to commuters today. Back then, not only were there few forms of transportation to choose from, they were few and far between, with only a small number of forms of transportation that were more efficient than walking. Nowadays, we have many forms of transportation to choose from ranging from muscle powered inline skates, and bicycles, to internal combustion engine powered cars, trucks, motorcycles, and mopeds. Clearly, and understanding in the limited forms of transportation in the past do not provided the insight to solve the commuting issues of modern day urban living."

 

I feel this essay will be scored an:

JKLMNOPQRST