Dr. Pectacular Posted June 10, 2011 Report Share Posted June 10, 2011 Can you please correct my first essay!! Thanks soo much for the help!! To obey an unjust law is to approve of it. Describe a specific situation in which obeying an unjust law might not necessarily mean approving of it. Discuss what you think determines when disobeying a law is justified. Laws have been developed since ancient times. Laws are created to bring stability and order in a society. They aslo differ in many ways, laws can be just or unjust, and the approval of these laws differ tremendously depending on the time and place of the situation. First of all, an example in which obeying unjust laws without approving of them, can be traced at the time when racisim, segregation and discrimination between black vs white people where at an all time high. The big reason why there was a rift against both peoples were the laws that isolated freedoms of the black communities in engaging in oppurtunties that were held only for the white community. Even though the black community were against the harsh rules and laws that minimized their freedom or rights. They were still forced to obey the laws for the safety of themselves and their loved ones. Another example to this statement could at the time the holocauslt was at large. The jewish people that were taken from their homes and family were forced to abide in the harsh rules bestowed on them as a means of surivival or fear, but most likely did not approve of it. Moreover, there are also laws that are being broken but considered justifiable in specific situations. An example to this statement are doctors performing euthanasia on patients that are willing to die. Situations or issues like these are an up most importance in the medical community. Many countries around the globe have established laws prohibiting the act of euthanasia on the patients. Reasons behind the act of performing euthanasia on patient is that, it relieves the added stress on the patient and his/her family members of the increaing amount of health care cost for caring for the patient who is living off medical equipment. Another example would be when doctors decide whether or not to disclose medical information to the patients spouse in the possibility of the patient contracting HIV-AIDS. The doctor must look at it in both ways, should he/she be willing to break possible confedentiality in order to save another life, and be deemed justifible for his/her actions or should the doctor respect confedientality of the patient and continue to obey laws that he/she does not think are justifiable. In conclusion, laws can be very generic and not exactly accomodating to all particularly difficult situations. This could be the reason why people tend to work around the laws, either using the laws for good or bad reasons. Which in turn can explain why not all individuals approve of laws bestowed upon them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llsoftll Posted June 10, 2011 Report Share Posted June 10, 2011 People too often believe that liberty is maximized when obligations are minimized. Freedom and restrictions are two very polar terms, yet they are used together very often. Humanity is exposed to those two words in everyday life: magazines, news, or even their own personal life. The balance between liberty and obligations, however, is often too vague and is not defined clearly. Many would believe that the words freedom and obligations have an inverse relationship; as one decreases, the other increases. In this case, the maximum liberty is achieved only when the obligations are at its lowest point. Liberty could be defined as the freedom of expressing its own individuality in a business, or a political field. As well, obligations would mean the set of rules and rights that an individual would exercise. The range of individual freedom would be maximized should there be a low level of required actions to be taken to achieve the goal. A business in the province of Manitoba, in Canada, is often required to oblige to very many, sometimes unnecessary, set of rules. An individual operating a business would be forced to apply for many permits, including the one for selling fishing licenses. Manitoba Conservation Licensing Branch recently changed the requirement for its permit vendors to sell a minimum of $30,000 worth of licenses per year. One fishing license is about $20, so it would mean the seller would have to sell about 150 licenses per year. The number may not look high, but there are many vendors who do not fit into the criteria. Such individuals want to expand their range of items to carry, however the restriction would not allow them to. To say, if the fishing season is poor one year, many vendors whose business depends on the leisure fishing industry would be limited to expand on their range of products, including the licenses. Thus, certain obligations do limit an individual’s liberty at operating a business. The supposed inverse relationship between freedom and restriction, however, is direct in some cases. That is to say, liberty and obligation share the same pattern: as one is maximized, the other needs to increase as well. There are many obligations, the rights that an individual supposes to enact, on Canadian citizens. One of the main examples is voting rights. On May 2, 2011, an election to elect the ruling party and the Prime Minister was held across Canada. However, there was a low voter turnout, just shy over 50% of the individuals qualified to vote. When the Conservative Party lead by Stephen Harper was ensured a majority government, the trending issue among Canadian individuals who use Tweeter was the election results. The most popular hashtags – a term used in Twitter to signify the main idea of an author – were #elxn41, #Canada, et cetera. Clearly, the Conservatives won more than half of the seats available, and it was the Canadian citizens who voted for the party. The liberty of an individual to express its opinion to the political depends on that person exercising the right to vote. As half of Canadian citizens were able to observe their obligations, their opinions were heard and thoroughly expressed in the political field of Canada. The effect of the obligation on the liberty of an individual’s life would determine the balance between the two. If obeying the obligation inhibits an individual’s liberty, then the inverse relationship would suit. As for the liberty of an individual in operating a business, minimized obligations related to restrictions would lead to an economic liberty, defined as the ability of express individuality. Diminished rules may allow businesses to expand its range of products to offer to its customers, such as many vendors in Manitoban fishing industry being able to sell permits without the worry to reach a certain limit to meet the requirement of the government. On the other hand, there are occasions where following the obligations would benefit a person. Almost all people have access to the rights that they can exercise, and they do become obligations. Mainly, the voting rights fit the criteria. Voting, which is an obligation of citizens in a democratic country during an election day is a rule that determines whether citizens are able to express their political opinion to a country. For example, half of the Canadian citizens exercised their right to vote and as a result, they have obtained a Conservative government to rule the country for the next few years. I don't know how to thank you enough for doing this! I really appreciate your help! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaInhaler Posted June 11, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 11, 2011 NEW RULES: You must read before posting your essay. Click Here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Pectacular Posted June 12, 2011 Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 -clicked- Thanks for the Help!! The introduction of modern technologies is harmful to underdeveloped areas of the world. Describe a specific situation in which the introduction of modern technologies might not be harmful to an underdeveloped area of the world. Discuss what you think determines whether or not the introduction of modern technologies is harmful to underdeveloped areas of the world. Technology is an ever growing product in todays society. It provides an easier and more manageable way of living. Modern technology provide enhanced development in agriculture, health care, government policy, infasructure duties in order to better satesfiy communities, and increases the value of countries towards better attraction in the tourism business and other businesses. An example modern technology can help underdeveloped countries succed in everyday living against other countries, by creating new jobs in order to increase the flow of dollars for other things that are needed for improvements in that area. Also, it increases popularity value for suffecent trade business with other countries who acquire a developed status within their system, and attract potential business corporations and business people to make valuable deals and partnership with underdeveloped areas in improving overall living in that area. These business deals can create improvements to underveloped areas with providing new and very effective water sanitation techology to clean the water sources in which can reduce the increasing amount of illnesses accociated with the dirty water. Also, provided better technology through deals with the health care business can reduce the amount of deaths by lack of valuable medical tools and medicine that could have easily been prevented these diseases. However, there are ways in which modern technology can be harmful to an underdeveloped country. For example war fare technology can be handed to the wrong hands to be misused for the wrong reason. Instead of using the technology for protection of ones country, it can be used wrongly by using it to control a country robbing the people of their freedom. For example in the Rwanda genocide. Rwanda is considered an underdeveloped country and developed countries used that to their advantage by distributing modern technology to the people of rwanda, which later coincided in a hated genocide war against each other killing millions of people. Moreover, technology can be a good thing for underdeveloped areas, for example, by using modern technology to improve the farming business to better establish sufficient food for everyone. Providing better educational system to allow generations to follow in the expansion of the tecnology. Finally modern technology can develop better infastructure for tourism or satisfaction purposes, so the people can know that they can be proud of their countries rapid development with the help of technology. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llsoftll Posted June 12, 2011 Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 -clicked!- People too often believe that liberty is maximized when obligations are minimized. Freedom and restrictions are two very polar terms, yet they are used together very often. Humanity is exposed to those two words in everyday life: magazines, news, or even their own personal life. The balance between liberty and obligations, however, is often too vague and is not defined clearly. Many would believe that the words freedom and obligations have an inverse relationship; as one decreases, the other increases. In this case, the maximum liberty is achieved only when the obligations are at its lowest point. Liberty could be defined as the freedom of expressing its own individuality in a business, or a political field. As well, obligations would mean the set of rules and rights that an individual would exercise. The range of individual freedom would be maximized should there be a low level of required actions to be taken to achieve the goal. A business in the province of Manitoba, in Canada, is often required to oblige to very many, sometimes unnecessary, set of rules. An individual operating a business would be forced to apply for many permits, including the one for selling fishing licenses. Manitoba Conservation Licensing Branch recently changed the requirement for its permit vendors to sell a minimum of $30,000 worth of licenses per year. One fishing license is about $20, so it would mean the seller would have to sell about 150 licenses per year. The number may not look high, but there are many vendors who do not fit into the criteria. Such individuals want to expand their range of items to carry, however the restriction would not allow them to. To say, if the fishing season is poor one year, many vendors whose business depends on the leisure fishing industry would be limited to expand on their range of products, including the licenses. Thus, certain obligations do limit an individual’s liberty at operating a business. The supposed inverse relationship between freedom and restriction, however, is direct in some cases. That is to say, liberty and obligation share the same pattern: as one is maximized, the other needs to increase as well. There are many obligations, the rights that an individual supposes to enact, on Canadian citizens. One of the main examples is voting rights. On May 2, 2011, an election to elect the ruling party and the Prime Minister was held across Canada. However, there was a low voter turnout, just shy over 50% of the individuals qualified to vote. When the Conservative Party lead by Stephen Harper was ensured a majority government, the trending issue among Canadian individuals who use Tweeter was the election results. The most popular hashtags – a term used in Twitter to signify the main idea of an author – were #elxn41, #Canada, et cetera. Clearly, the Conservatives won more than half of the seats available, and it was the Canadian citizens who voted for the party. The liberty of an individual to express its opinion to the political depends on that person exercising the right to vote. As half of Canadian citizens were able to observe their obligations, their opinions were heard and thoroughly expressed in the political field of Canada. The effect of the obligation on the liberty of an individual’s life would determine the balance between the two. If obeying the obligation inhibits an individual’s liberty, then the inverse relationship would suit. As for the liberty of an individual in operating a business, minimized obligations related to restrictions would lead to an economic liberty, defined as the ability of express individuality. Diminished rules may allow businesses to expand its range of products to offer to its customers, such as many vendors in Manitoban fishing industry being able to sell permits without the worry to reach a certain limit to meet the requirement of the government. On the other hand, there are occasions where following the obligations would benefit a person. Almost all people have access to the rights that they can exercise, and they do become obligations. Mainly, the voting rights fit the criteria. Voting, which is an obligation of citizens in a democratic country during an election day is a rule that determines whether citizens are able to express their political opinion to a country. For example, half of the Canadian citizens exercised their right to vote and as a result, they have obtained a Conservative government to rule the country for the next few years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pacemaker Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 -Clicked- True appreciation of art requires an understanding of the goals of the artist. Art is a way of expression of one’s own beleifs, values, thoughts, feelings, emotions, talents and abilities. It can take many forms such as dance, music, visual arts (painting, drawing etc), sculpting, carving and much more. A given piece of art can generally be viewed and interpreted in many different ways. Thus, it may have different meanings for different individuals. It can also bring about different feelings and emotions in different individuals. For one to truly appreciate a given piece of art, he/she needs to be aware of the goals of the artists. More specifically, one needs to understand the motives of the artist that were behind creating a given piece and the message that he/she is trying to get across to the audience. Only then, a viewer can fully understand the art being presented and be truly appreciative of it. For example, Indian classical dance is a form of art that is often used to pay tribute to the various Hindu dieties. As such, it involves various facial expressions and music written in Sanskrit. It often involves singers and dancers. The dancers are dressed in traditional classical dance clothing and accessories. They also make use of many gestures and facial expressions to convey their message of love and respect towards a particular Hindu diety. In this case, an understanding of the goals of the artist (including the dancer and the singer) is important for an individual in the audience to be truly appreciative of this form of dance. This form of dance holds a very concrete and specific meaning which cannot be interpreted in different ways. In contrast, it is not always necessary for an individual to understand the goals of an artist in order to truly appreciate art. An individual can still enjoy and appreciate a given art piece by using his/her own imagination to associate certain meanings, feelings and emotions to the art piece. This is expecially true for modern art. Modern art is a form of visual art where artists may make a painting that is quite abstract. It is not a protrayal of any given person, place or object. Instead, it is the use of various colours and painting techniques used to express the imagination, feelings and emotions of the artist. Therefore, in this form of art, one cannot force the feelings and emotions of the artist onto oneself. It is primarily upto the viewer to interpret what they see as well as allow their feelings and emotions to emerge freely. This would allow the viewer to truly appreciate the art piece for themselves. In conclusion, various different forms of art are used as a mode of expression. Art is often seen as a form of communication where one can freely express himself/herself. An understanding of the artists’ goals is important in certain cases where a strong and concrete message is being portrayed. This was particularly evident in the example of the Indian classical dance where a basic understanding of the artists’ goals is necessary since one cannot place different interpretions on this form of art. On the other hand, abstract forms of art such as modern art that may hold various different meanings, feelings and emotions for different individuals does not require the viewer to have an understanding of the artists’goals in order to truly appreciate it. Thanks PastaInhaler for offering this service! Looking forward to your comments and feedback. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pacemaker Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 -Clicked- A government has not only the right, but also the responsibility, to regulate what is broadcast over the public airwaves. Government is a socailly constructed group of individuals that are responsible for making decisions on behalf of the masses. The government has the power as well as the responsibility to make decisions that are likely to affect a great number of individuals in the general public. Public broadcasting is a way that is used to convey many different forms of information to a huge audience. This audience includes many individuals that can be from different age groups, ethnic backgrounds and social class. Since public broadcasting is targetted towards a huge group of individuals from the general public, it is the responsibility of the government to regulate its content. This is especially important in situations where young children are involved as viewers. For example, TVO (TV Ontario) is a channel that provides children friendly broadcasting with many educational programs, cartoons and appropriate advertising. This is the form of television that most parents would prefer to have for their children. Inappropriate content can be detremental for the the psychological development of future generations. Children are naive and are not at a stage to be able to make decisions for themselves. Young children are unaware of what is considered to be good versus bad in the real world. Therefore, it is in the best interests of the society as a whole to ensure a safe, positive and motivating environment for the youngters. In such situations, it is the responsibility of the government to regulate the content being broadcasted over public airwaves to ensure age appropriate content if being shown on kids television channels. In contrast, it is not the responsibility of the government to regulate what is broadcasted over the public airwaves on adult television channels. Individuals in the broadcasting field should be allowed with the freedom of speech and expression to be able to show whatever they like. Similarly, members of the audience should be given the freedom to choose whether or not they wish to watch the content being broadcasted. For example, shows such as Special Victims Unit depict fictional characters in crime settings and may have some disturbing scenes. As long as these shows explicitly provide a warning at the beginning of the show to allow a given individual to make an informed decision, there is no need for the government to intervene. Adults are capable of making decisions for themselves and should be allowed to do so in the case of viewing content that is broadcasted over public airwaves. In conclusion, government consists of a group of individuals that are given the power to make decisions on the behalf of the public. Thus, the government has been given the tremendous responsibility to make decisions that are likely to affect a huge group of individuals. In the case of regulation of the content being broadcasted over public airwaves, it is the responsibility of the government to regulate the content being shown on kids’ channels since they are unable to make decisions for themselves. On the other hand, it is not the responsibility of the government to regulate the content being shown on adult channels since adults are capable of making decisions for themselves. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaInhaler Posted June 13, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 -clicked- Thanks for the Help!! The introduction of modern technologies is harmful to underdeveloped areas of the world. Describe a specific situation in which the introduction of modern technologies might not be harmful to an underdeveloped area of the world. Discuss what you think determines whether or not the introduction of modern technologies is harmful to underdeveloped areas of the world. Technology is an ever growing product in todays society. It provides an easier and more manageable way of living. Modern technology provide enhanced development in agriculture, health care, government policy, infasructure duties in order to better satesfiy communities, and increases the value of countries towards better attraction in the tourism business and other businesses. An example modern technology can help underdeveloped countries succed in everyday living against other countries, by creating new jobs in order to increase the flow of dollars for other things that are needed for improvements in that area. Also, it increases popularity value for suffecent trade business with other countries who acquire a developed status within their system, and attract potential business corporations and business people to make valuable deals and partnership with underdeveloped areas in improving overall living in that area. These business deals can create improvements to underveloped areas with providing new and very effective water sanitation techology to clean the water sources in which can reduce the increasing amount of illnesses accociated with the dirty water. Also, provided better technology through deals with the health care business can reduce the amount of deaths by lack of valuable medical tools and medicine that could have easily been prevented these diseases. However, there are ways in which modern technology can be harmful to an underdeveloped country. For example war fare technology can be handed to the wrong hands to be misused for the wrong reason. Instead of using the technology for protection of ones country, it can be used wrongly by using it to control a country robbing the people of their freedom. For example in the Rwanda genocide. Rwanda is considered an underdeveloped country and developed countries used that to their advantage by distributing modern technology to the people of rwanda, which later coincided in a hated genocide war against each other killing millions of people. Moreover, technology can be a good thing for underdeveloped areas, for example, by using modern technology to improve the farming business to better establish sufficient food for everyone. Providing better educational system to allow generations to follow in the expansion of the tecnology. Finally modern technology can develop better infastructure for tourism or satisfaction purposes, so the people can know that they can be proud of their countries rapid development with the help of technology. Thanks for clicking. There were numerous errors in mechanics, usage, or sentence structure. Problems with organization, integration, and coherence of ideas. Key ideas are largely undeveloped. Task#1 and task#3 were not adequately addressed, and task#2 was undeveloped. You were to explain how technology can be bad for underdeveloped areas of the world and to explain this in your own words. You can then use some of your examples to back up your explanation. Task#3 involves explaining when technology is bad for underdeveloped areas, and when it is good for underdeveloped areas. This explanation and discussion was also missing from the essay. I feel this essay will be scored an: JK/LMNOPQRST Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaInhaler Posted June 13, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 -clicked!-People too often believe that liberty is maximized when obligations are minimized. Freedom and restrictions are two very polar terms, yet they are used together very often. Humanity is exposed to those two words in everyday life: magazines, news, or even their own personal life. The balance between liberty and obligations, however, is often too vague and is not defined clearly. Many would believe that the words freedom and obligations have an inverse relationship; as one decreases, the other increases. In this case, the maximum liberty is achieved only when the obligations are at its lowest point. Liberty could be defined as the freedom of expressing its own individuality in a business, or a political field. As well, obligations would mean the set of rules and rights that an individual would exercise. The range of individual freedom would be maximized should there be a low level of required actions to be taken to achieve the goal. A business in the province of Manitoba, in Canada, is often required to oblige to very many, sometimes unnecessary, set of rules. An individual operating a business would be forced to apply for many permits, including the one for selling fishing licenses. Manitoba Conservation Licensing Branch recently changed the requirement for its permit vendors to sell a minimum of $30,000 worth of licenses per year. One fishing license is about $20, so it would mean the seller would have to sell about 150 licenses per year. The number may not look high, but there are many vendors who do not fit into the criteria. Such individuals want to expand their range of items to carry, however the restriction would not allow them to. To say, if the fishing season is poor one year, many vendors whose business depends on the leisure fishing industry would be limited to expand on their range of products, including the licenses. Thus, certain obligations do limit an individual’s liberty at operating a business. The supposed inverse relationship between freedom and restriction, however, is direct in some cases. That is to say, liberty and obligation share the same pattern: as one is maximized, the other needs to increase as well. There are many obligations, the rights that an individual supposes to enact, on Canadian citizens. One of the main examples is voting rights. On May 2, 2011, an election to elect the ruling party and the Prime Minister was held across Canada. However, there was a low voter turnout, just shy over 50% of the individuals qualified to vote. When the Conservative Party lead by Stephen Harper was ensured a majority government, the trending issue among Canadian individuals who use Tweeter was the election results. The most popular hashtags – a term used in Twitter to signify the main idea of an author – were #elxn41, #Canada, et cetera. Clearly, the Conservatives won more than half of the seats available, and it was the Canadian citizens who voted for the party. The liberty of an individual to express its opinion to the political depends on that person exercising the right to vote. As half of Canadian citizens were able to observe their obligations, their opinions were heard and thoroughly expressed in the political field of Canada. The effect of the obligation on the liberty of an individual’s life would determine the balance between the two. If obeying the obligation inhibits an individual’s liberty, then the inverse relationship would suit. As for the liberty of an individual in operating a business, minimized obligations related to restrictions would lead to an economic liberty, defined as the ability of express individuality. Diminished rules may allow businesses to expand its range of products to offer to its customers, such as many vendors in Manitoban fishing industry being able to sell permits without the worry to reach a certain limit to meet the requirement of the government. On the other hand, there are occasions where following the obligations would benefit a person. Almost all people have access to the rights that they can exercise, and they do become obligations. Mainly, the voting rights fit the criteria. Voting, which is an obligation of citizens in a democratic country during an election day is a rule that determines whether citizens are able to express their political opinion to a country. For example, half of the Canadian citizens exercised their right to vote and as a result, they have obtained a Conservative government to rule the country for the next few years. Adequate control of language with few grammatical or usage problem. The essay started out strong, but later became less coherent. Around the beginning of paragraph #2, the essay demonstrated less clarity of thought. You must be careful of using scientific style explanations for sociopolitical themes, for instance, 'inverse relationship.' These are not easy arguments to grasp by those in non-scientific fields. The counter-argument was not clear from your example in paragraph #2. You need to show through your example how a lot of obligations is associated with more liberty. How are these two themes related? People should vote as often as the need arises, but how does having a majority Conservative government yield more liberty? This important idea was not well clarified in the essay. It follows that an unclear task#2 will produce a weakened task#3. The question of what determines when there is a relationship between lots of liberty with little obligations, and when there is lots of liberty with lots of obligations remains unanswered. I feel this essay will be scored an: JKLMNOPQRST Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caduceus Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 -clicked- <--- this was a brilliant idea A career-oriented education is not necessarily the best education. Describe a specific situation in which a career-oriented education might prove to be the best education. Discuss what you think determines when a career-oriented education is the best education and when it is not. Since its inception, one of the primary goals of education has been to increase the cognitive abilities and aptitudes of students. Cognitive abilities and aptitudes are those mental vehicles that drive us to the forefront of every academic discipline; they are what separates humanity from other animals on the planet. Therefore, it is conceivable to suppose that an education that is directly involved with only teaching the repetitive job skills applied from day to day in the workplace is not necessarily the best education. In fact, it could be argued that such an education, while being career-oriented, undermines the very founding principle of education, and debases its purpose. For instance, an education in the liberal arts, while not necessarily being career-oriented, is one of the most effective ways in which critical thinking ability can be developed. While critical thinking ability is not necessarily a directly applicable career-oriented skill, it is indeed a highly useful skill with incalculable benefits. Such a benefit, for example, is that a businessperson with critical thinking ability can objectively analyze financial data to determine an underlying cause of a budget shortfall, whereas one with only rudimentary training in bookkeeping, could not see such a cause. In this way, the cognitive gains facilitated by education can be more effective than direct career-oriented training. However, it can also be argued that education also has the fundamental purpose of being a vehicle by which students can improve their economic condition, and hence their quality of life. In the modern economic climate, one's skill at their job can determine whether they succeed in that position or not. For instance, to succeed as an electrician, while cognitive and critical-thinking abilities developed by a liberal arts education are certainly useful, they are not necessarily conducive to creating the best electrician possible. Rather, the skills that he or she applies directly on the job are what separates this electrician from a mediocre one. Therefore, in this case, a career-oriented education is one that would directly create the most benefit in the life of the electrician, as an education should. So, in this case, a career-oriented education may indeed prove to be the best education. It is this dichotomy between the seemingly conflicting goals of education, to both improve the quality of life and cognitive ability of students that raises the fundamental question of whether education should be career-oriented or not. In order to reconcile these two conflicting goals, note that in some cases, in order for one to be truly successful in their chosen career, one needs a certain level of cognitive ability that cannot be directly taught as a career-oriented skill. Therefore, in keeping with the dual principles of education as stated above, we conclude that the best education is one which ultimately allows an individual to improve their quality of life. That is, if the chosen career requires skills to truly succeed that cannot be directly taught, as in the case of the businessperson stated above, then a career-oriented education is not the best education, as the cognitive development provided by a liberal arts education is indispensable. Furthermore, in the case of the electrician described above, to truly succeed in that position, superior day-to-day job skills are absolutely necessary, and these can be taught best and most efficiently, through a career-based education. Therefore, it is the form of education that allows the student to most effectively achieve their career aspirations while improving their quality of life and cognitive abilities, that is the best form of education for them. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaInhaler Posted June 13, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 -Clicked- True appreciation of art requires an understanding of the goals of the artist. Art is a way of expression of one’s own beleifs, values, thoughts, feelings, emotions, talents and abilities. It can take many forms such as dance, music, visual arts (painting, drawing etc), sculpting, carving and much more. A given piece of art can generally be viewed and interpreted in many different ways. Thus, it may have different meanings for different individuals. It can also bring about different feelings and emotions in different individuals. For one to truly appreciate a given piece of art, he/she needs to be aware of the goals of the artists. More specifically, one needs to understand the motives of the artist that were behind creating a given piece and the message that he/she is trying to get across to the audience. Only then, a viewer can fully understand the art being presented and be truly appreciative of it. For example, Indian classical dance is a form of art that is often used to pay tribute to the various Hindu dieties. As such, it involves various facial expressions and music written in Sanskrit. It often involves singers and dancers. The dancers are dressed in traditional classical dance clothing and accessories. They also make use of many gestures and facial expressions to convey their message of love and respect towards a particular Hindu diety. In this case, an understanding of the goals of the artist (including the dancer and the singer) is important for an individual in the audience to be truly appreciative of this form of dance. This form of dance holds a very concrete and specific meaning which cannot be interpreted in different ways. In contrast, it is not always necessary for an individual to understand the goals of an artist in order to truly appreciate art. An individual can still enjoy and appreciate a given art piece by using his/her own imagination to associate certain meanings, feelings and emotions to the art piece. This is expecially true for modern art. Modern art is a form of visual art where artists may make a painting that is quite abstract. It is not a protrayal of any given person, place or object. Instead, it is the use of various colours and painting techniques used to express the imagination, feelings and emotions of the artist. Therefore, in this form of art, one cannot force the feelings and emotions of the artist onto oneself. It is primarily upto the viewer to interpret what they see as well as allow their feelings and emotions to emerge freely. This would allow the viewer to truly appreciate the art piece for themselves. In conclusion, various different forms of art are used as a mode of expression. Art is often seen as a form of communication where one can freely express himself/herself. An understanding of the artists’ goals is important in certain cases where a strong and concrete message is being portrayed. This was particularly evident in the example of the Indian classical dance where a basic understanding of the artists’ goals is necessary since one cannot place different interpretions on this form of art. On the other hand, abstract forms of art such as modern art that may hold various different meanings, feelings and emotions for different individuals does not require the viewer to have an understanding of the artists’goals in order to truly appreciate it. Thanks PastaInhaler for offering this service! Looking forward to your comments and feedback. Good job on the first example. Task #1 was adequately addressed. Yet, task#2 was not adequately addressed. You seem to be describing abstract expressionism for your example. In this form of "modern art," the artist, while trying to maintain credibility, or actually being truthful, has an "intent" behind the piece, and does have a goal. It's hard to truly understand the piece and to appreciate it without knowing what the piece is all about. (i.e. how can you measure if the painter did a good job of what he was trying to do/slapping on paint to a canvas haphazardly if you didn't know what he was trying to do in the first place?) You will need to try with another example, something simpler. Some critics (not all), don't recognize abstract expressionism as a true art form, maybe they are right, or they could be wrong because they don't truly understand it. You should try a different example, maybe a different school of painting, i.e. Surrealism, or Cubism (some painters have gone mad, crazy, so you don't know what their goals are...may be easier to argue from this angle). Writing is otherwise good, with few errors in mechanics. The final task#3 was weakened due to task#2, but can be alleviated with a different example. You may consider that Hindu dance is an expression of a culture or religion, and it is important to understand the goal and context because of this. Cubism is not an expression of a religion, but you appreciate how novel the work is, how cool and awesome the style is, and how straight the lines are, and how curvy curves are, despite the painter going crazy.... I feel this essay will be scored an: JKLMNOPQRST Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llsoftll Posted June 14, 2011 Report Share Posted June 14, 2011 -clicked!- (thank you! ) We must obey not only the laws of which we approve, but also those of which we may not approve. Humanity owes a big thank-you for the existence of laws; with them, world is less of a chaos than what it was before. As humanity is capable of thinking and judgment, a coherent approval in regards to certain laws do not exist. Laws are defined as the set of rules in which one is expected to abide to. As citizens of a nation, however, individuals are asked to obey the laws regardless of their own opinion for the good of a country. For example, in Manitoba, Canada, there was a new regulation introduced to the tobacco businesses including big-box stores such as Superstore and Safeway, to cover up the tobacco products manually. The owners were forced to hide the tobacco products behind a curtain or anything that disguised them from the sight of the customers. The reason being was that seeing tobacco products may stimulate the customers into buying them. And this law was introduced to protect the health of many Manitoba residents. Many customers did not find the law suitable, nor did the owners of businesses as they had to spend extra expenses and explain to customers about the new regulation. Most smokers did not quit smoking just because the products were hidden behind a curtain; and business owners were the first to know that the law had no effect. And yet, they were to abide the law as it was imposed by the Manitoban government. This shows an example of how citizens should abide the laws regardless of their own opinions about them. On the other hand, there are circumstances where the laws that are not approved by citizens are to be not obeyed. For example, in the year of 1970s, Republic of Korea - now commonly known as South Korea - was under the control of a military-based dictatorship. The rights of many individuals were not protected. Mainly, those who were considered as a threat to the ruler were tortured. People were not allowed to express their criticism against the ruling government. Young adults at the time, many of them enrolled in universities, certainly did not approve of all the restrictions that the dictator listed. Soon, they began a revolt of a century against the dictatorship. They fought for their rights to obtain a democracy in South Korea; and after a bloody revolt, South Korea was able to gain democracy that continues until this moment. South Koreans at the time, led by young adults, did not approve of the laws set forth by a dictator and of course did not obey them. However, due to their action, the country was able to enter the era of democracy and the rights of those oppressed by the government were protected. What determines whether people should obey the law, regardless of its worthwhile, is the effect of the law on individuals’ rights. If the law does not impose an immediate threat to an individual’s basic rights, then the law is to be obeyed. For example, being asked to hid the tobacco products behind a curtain in a grocery store do not violate any human rights. And the business owners are to abide the law. However, when the law poses a danger to rights of an individual, citizens do not have a responsibility to abide such laws. People of South Korea at the 1970s did not approve the ruling of a dictator and many laws that suppressed individuals’ rights. They did not obey them, of course; they rather revolted against them to gain democracy and their rights. Thus, the impact on individual’s basic human rights should be a determining factor as to whether people should be obeying certain laws or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vancouver.2010 Posted June 14, 2011 Report Share Posted June 14, 2011 -clicked!- History is the record of humanity's wars. Describe a specific situation in which history might be the record of something other than humanity's wars. Discuss what you think determines when history should be the record of humanity's wars and when it should be something else. History is an account of historical events and serves different purposes depending on the type of event. History may be a record of humanity’s wars when it serves to remind us of those who fought for their countries and the changes that took place but history may also be an account of scientific discoveries when its purpose is to inspire further developments and research. Historical records of humanity’s wars are in places such as documentaries on television and textbooks. They remind us of those who fought in war, the sacrifices they made in honour of their countries, and the tragic changes that took place following the war. For example, one of the greatest wars in history includes World War I, which began in 1914 and finally ended on November 11th, 1918. To this day, we are still reminded of the aftermath following the war such as the tremendous loss of life and destruction of communities. In fact, we designate November 11th as Remembrance Day to remember the lives lost, the blood spilt, and the end to the war. On the other hand, when history is an account of scientific discoveries, its purpose is to educate us on the technological advancements scientists have made and inspire those in research to continue with this type of momentum. For example, the discovery of Insulin by Banting and Best at the University of Toronto in the 1900s serves to tell us how the remedy for Type I Diabetes (and more or less, Type II Diabetes) had been discovered and isolated. Insulin therapy has increased the life expectancy of many type I diabetics since its discovery; without insulin, their bodies would have been incapable of using glucose and therefore, starved to death literally. Banting and Best had sparked the hope that there would someday be a cure to Type I Diabetes and provided a starting point for related research. For example, may other developments have been made since the discovery and isolation of insulin; we now have blood glucose monitors that can indicate a patient’s blood sugar level and different insulin types (long-acting and short-acting) used to manage diabetes. Records of scientific discoveries have provided us with a better understanding of the routes we took to advance to today’s technology and inspired scientists to continue to search for answers to their questions. Historical records detail many things. Whether it is a record of humanity’s wars or scientific discoveries will depend on the purpose they serve. To remind us of how our nations developed, they are records of humanity’s wars. To enhance learning and inspire research, they are scientific discoveries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
numero0121407 Posted June 14, 2011 Report Share Posted June 14, 2011 -clicked- A successful politician resembels the ordinary citizen. A politicians success is measured by his/her ability to meet the needs of the citizens and provide solutions to their problems. Evidently, an elitist and superior position will not place the politician in a favourable place because he/she has to have an understanding of the struggles and difficulties people go through. He/she must be able to speak their langauge of every day life, and understand their struggles on a deep level in order to be able to find effective and strategic solutions. Being of a higher social class can be argued to create a barrier that excludes a politician from the majority of people as he/she will not have sufficient exposure to represent a group to whom he/she never belonged. On the other hand, being "one of the common people" and resembling their life in its various aspects undoubtedly grants the politician easier means to success. For example, Barak Obama's popularity and success came from the fact that people could relate to him. The majority of the population saw the potential in Obama by virtue of his self-presentation as the ordinary "caring father", "loving husband", and "good basketball player". Having started his term on such strong basis of raport with his constituients is definitely going to play a positive role in his reception in the future, and thus, his success as a politician. Although such resemblance of the ordinary citizens a means "seeing the world from their perspective", there is no doubt that success in politics requires a differentiating factor that makes the individual a suitable leader to begin with. Education, experience, wisdom, and charisma are all factors in a politician's success, all of which are rarely characteristics of ordinary citizens. This is also evident in the case of Barak Obama. Despite the fact that his political career is still in its infancy, his success manifested itself by his ability to distinguish himself from other candidates (much less from ordinary citizens) as the smarter, the more reasonable, the wiser, the more likely one to bring the long-awaited "change" to America. Thus, the successful politician resembles the ordinary citizens in so much to meet their needs and understand their struggles, while differing from them in matters that requires the wisdom of a leader is in fact a required and desirable trait in a successful political leader. In fact, this difference does not suggest a level of alienation; it rather promotes a successful position from which a leader sees the struggles and problems faced by the population by virtue of his resemblance to them, and at the same time, he is able to propose meaningful and potential solutions based on his experience, knowledge, and wisdom as a leader. It is this binary vision that truely distinguishes a successful and intelligent politician from other politicians or other citizens for that matter. ------------------------------------------- THANK YOU! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genemo Posted June 14, 2011 Report Share Posted June 14, 2011 The public's right to information should override the government's need for security. Democracy relies on the public’s right to information. Without enough information and knowledge, voters can hardly make good decisions or choose their best political representatives. Thus, in a democratic country, the government is responsible to release as much information as possible to keep the public informed, for the society to function smoothly. Failing to release enough information, a government may lose their reliability and risk serious social problems. Such examples are plenty in countries in China, where the government keep all the information confidential and make political decisions in their secret conference room. Citizens have no access to the information which political decisions are made out of, and this allows rumors to spread. When the 9.0 earthquake happened in Japan in the March of 2011, a rumor was spreading in Chinese that salt contains high level of iridium and could prevent radiation. In a matter of days, salt in all markets were purchased despite the government’s effort on educating the public that no evidence has shown iridium in salt could prevent radiation. The rumor turned out to be created by some salt seller with commercial purpose. It illustrates how a government failing to reveal enough information to citizens may lose citizens’ trust so that such ridiculous rumor could spread in the public easily. Although it is important for the public to have access to information, not all information should be released to general public, due to security concerns. Military technical information should be kept highly confidential in order to keep the country safe. Once released, such information does not benefit the public but could be taken used by hostile countries or terrorists and threaten the public safety. An example is the nuclear weapon technology. This information could potentially cause severe damage to a country and its citizens, and thus should be kept only within the government authorized agency. It is helpful to identify which countries possess this information and ensure this technology will not be abused to cause trouble on humankind. In this situation, public’s right to information should not override the government’s need for safety. To determine when the public’s right to information should override the government’s need for safety or not, the information needs to be examined for its value in the public and its risk to cause problem. When the information is closely related to public concern, or is used for making political decision, it is important for the public to be aware of. Thus, the public’s right to information ought to be respected and sufficient information should be released for public education purpose. On the other hand, when the information is not so closely related to the public, but has a high risk to be abused to cause social problem, the information should be controlled and remain confidential. However, there are occasions that certain information is closely related to public concern while has a high risk to cause trouble. In this situation, the government could choose to release some general information for the public to know, while keep the details or vital part confidential. In this way, the government can balance the gain and the risk to maintain good public support and security. Thank you. And I already clicked the website. This essay was written under no time limit. Just want to see how well I could write given enough time. I think I wrote this in 40min or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genemo Posted June 14, 2011 Report Share Posted June 14, 2011 Today's mobile society often loses in family and community ties what it gains in individual freedom. Describe a specific situation in which mobility might enhance family or community ties. Discuss what you think determines which is more important to the individual--mobility, or maintaining family and community ties. Nowadays, it is not rarely seen that young people leave their family in their twenties to work and live in a far away city. In a city like Richmond in British Columbia, more than 30% of the population are immigrants, and many of them moved to Canada in their young age, leaving their family in the home country. In today’s mobile society, it takes several hours to drive between cities, or to travel between countries by plane, and this allows plenty room for individual freedom. Thousands of years ago, there were ancient Chinese poems describing travelling as life time events. Meeting friends living in a far away city was a huge event, and travelers returning home could be celebrated more than a traditional festival. But now, people could choose to move to a different city or a different country as long as they wish to, and could still visit their family quite often. Obviously we enjoy our freedom and we love sharing travel photos on Facebook to show off our freedom. At the same time, we spend less time with our family and community. And it not wrong to say we tend to lose in family and community ties, if the ties are defined as the time we spend on them. However, time is not the only factor considering family and community ties. Feelings also matter. It is very common to see kids fighting with their parents when they live at home, complaining their loss of freedom. But when kids grow up and leave the family, they start missing those days they spent with their parents. It is also common to hear people complaining about their country and social life, but actually start missing their homeland once they step on foreign lands. Today’s mobile society, although reduces our time spending with family and community, allows us to have various experiences, and allows us to have the chance to really think about what family and community means to us. In this sense, we only feel the importance of family and community ties when we travel around. We all want freedom, and we all want family and community. When we have limited time and limited options, we have to balance between them. Obviously, most people have eventually chosen freedom and mobility over family and community, and there is a good reason for that. Mobility provides not only freedom but various experiences for one to learn from the world. Local opportunities tend to be limited and mobility also provides the chance for us to develop our future and to realize our dreams. Fulfilling one’s dream is on the top of human desire and everyone would pursue it naturally. On the other hand, it is not impossible to be mobile while still keep the family tie. With the development of modern technology, we could talk to our family over the phone, see them on the computer camera and visit them several times a year. Although we may need to sacrifice the time spending with our family, each visit becomes more meaningful and valuable. With diverse experience, we better understand what family and community mean to us, which actually strength our emotional ties to them. Thus, it is a wise decision to choose to be mobile, to enjoy one’s freedom, to develop one’s career while still maintain an adequate contact with one’s family and community. Thank you! I clicked on the website. This one is written under time limit however I feel this topic is easy to write and I think my general writing is weaker than this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaInhaler Posted June 15, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 15, 2011 -Clicked- A government has not only the right, but also the responsibility, to regulate what is broadcast over the public airwaves. Government is a socailly constructed group of individuals that are responsible for making decisions on behalf of the masses. The government has the power as well as the responsibility to make decisions that are likely to affect a great number of individuals in the general public. Public broadcasting is a way that is used to convey many different forms of information to a huge audience. This audience includes many individuals that can be from different age groups, ethnic backgrounds and social class. Since public broadcasting is targetted towards a huge group of individuals from the general public, it is the responsibility of the government to regulate its content. This is especially important in situations where young children are involved as viewers. For example, TVO (TV Ontario) is a channel that provides children friendly broadcasting with many educational programs, cartoons and appropriate advertising. This is the form of television that most parents would prefer to have for their children. Inappropriate content can be detremental for the the psychological development of future generations. Children are naive and are not at a stage to be able to make decisions for themselves. Young children are unaware of what is considered to be good versus bad in the real world. Therefore, it is in the best interests of the society as a whole to ensure a safe, positive and motivating environment for the youngters. In such situations, it is the responsibility of the government to regulate the content being broadcasted over public airwaves to ensure age appropriate content if being shown on kids television channels. In contrast, it is not the responsibility of the government to regulate what is broadcasted over the public airwaves on adult television channels. Individuals in the broadcasting field should be allowed with the freedom of speech and expression to be able to show whatever they like. Similarly, members of the audience should be given the freedom to choose whether or not they wish to watch the content being broadcasted. For example, shows such as Special Victims Unit depict fictional characters in crime settings and may have some disturbing scenes. As long as these shows explicitly provide a warning at the beginning of the show to allow a given individual to make an informed decision, there is no need for the government to intervene. Adults are capable of making decisions for themselves and should be allowed to do so in the case of viewing content that is broadcasted over public airwaves. In conclusion, government consists of a group of individuals that are given the power to make decisions on the behalf of the public. Thus, the government has been given the tremendous responsibility to make decisions that are likely to affect a huge group of individuals. In the case of regulation of the content being broadcasted over public airwaves, it is the responsibility of the government to regulate the content being shown on kids’ channels since they are unable to make decisions for themselves. On the other hand, it is not the responsibility of the government to regulate the content being shown on adult channels since adults are capable of making decisions for themselves. Thanks! You're welcome, thanks for clicking. Adequate control of language, with few grammatical or usage problem. Ideas are somewhat developed. Tasks are adequately responded to, though ideas in task#3 could be expanded upon. I feel this essay will be scored an: JKLMNO/PQRST Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaInhaler Posted June 15, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 15, 2011 -clicked- <--- this was a brilliant idea A career-oriented education is not necessarily the best education. Describe a specific situation in which a career-oriented education might prove to be the best education. Discuss what you think determines when a career-oriented education is the best education and when it is not. Since its inception, one of the primary goals of education has been to increase the cognitive abilities and aptitudes of students. Cognitive abilities and aptitudes are those mental vehicles that drive us to the forefront of every academic discipline; they are what separates humanity from other animals on the planet. Therefore, it is conceivable to suppose that an education that is directly involved with only teaching the repetitive job skills applied from day to day in the workplace is not necessarily the best education. In fact, it could be argued that such an education, while being career-oriented, undermines the very founding principle of education, and debases its purpose. For instance, an education in the liberal arts, while not necessarily being career-oriented, is one of the most effective ways in which critical thinking ability can be developed. While critical thinking ability is not necessarily a directly applicable career-oriented skill, it is indeed a highly useful skill with incalculable benefits. Such a benefit, for example, is that a businessperson with critical thinking ability can objectively analyze financial data to determine an underlying cause of a budget shortfall, whereas one with only rudimentary training in bookkeeping, could not see such a cause. In this way, the cognitive gains facilitated by education can be more effective than direct career-oriented training. However, it can also be argued that education also has the fundamental purpose of being a vehicle by which students can improve their economic condition, and hence their quality of life. In the modern economic climate, one's skill at their job can determine whether they succeed in that position or not. For instance, to succeed as an electrician, while cognitive and critical-thinking abilities developed by a liberal arts education are certainly useful, they are not necessarily conducive to creating the best electrician possible. Rather, the skills that he or she applies directly on the job are what separates this electrician from a mediocre one. Therefore, in this case, a career-oriented education is one that would directly create the most benefit in the life of the electrician, as an education should. So, in this case, a career-oriented education may indeed prove to be the best education. It is this dichotomy between the seemingly conflicting goals of education, to both improve the quality of life and cognitive ability of students that raises the fundamental question of whether education should be career-oriented or not. In order to reconcile these two conflicting goals, note that in some cases, in order for one to be truly successful in their chosen career, one needs a certain level of cognitive ability that cannot be directly taught as a career-oriented skill. Therefore, in keeping with the dual principles of education as stated above, we conclude that the best education is one which ultimately allows an individual to improve their quality of life. That is, if the chosen career requires skills to truly succeed that cannot be directly taught, as in the case of the businessperson stated above, then a career-oriented education is not the best education, as the cognitive development provided by a liberal arts education is indispensable. Furthermore, in the case of the electrician described above, to truly succeed in that position, superior day-to-day job skills are absolutely necessary, and these can be taught best and most efficiently, through a career-based education. Therefore, it is the form of education that allows the student to most effectively achieve their career aspirations while improving their quality of life and cognitive abilities, that is the best form of education for them. Thanks! Thanks for clicking, glad that you like the ripple.org idea. You're welcome. Adequate control of language with few grammatical or usage problem. Ideas mostly presented in a coherent manner. There was a bit of a logical gap in the first example with the liberal arts major and the businessman. The idea you started was broken when in fact you wanted to show that the liberal arts major and businessman were the same person. You can patch this up, or separate the two ideas into two separate examples, but the former route is best. The tasks were adequately addressed. However, task#3 was not complete. It seems logically that what can be drawn from your examples is: the type of work a person may end up doing determines what type of education is best. You did not address this idea explicitly and will need to in order to bring the score up. I feel this essay will be scored an: JKLMNO/PQRST Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamone Posted June 15, 2011 Report Share Posted June 15, 2011 -clicked- I just wanted to know if you'd be willing to give feedback on an essay without grading it? I think you give good feedback, but I'm skeptical about the letter grades you give. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genemo Posted June 15, 2011 Report Share Posted June 15, 2011 -clicked- I just wanted to know if you'd be willing to give feedback on an essay without grading it? I think you give good feedback, but I'm skeptical about the letter grades you give. Then why dont you just ignore it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamone Posted June 15, 2011 Report Share Posted June 15, 2011 Then why dont you just ignore it? :confused Why would you ask that? I'm not asking for extra work from him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tothestars Posted June 15, 2011 Report Share Posted June 15, 2011 -clicked- To obey an unjust law is to approve of it. 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 obeying an unjust law might not necessarily mean approving of it. Discuss what you think determines when disobeying a law is justified. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Law is a system of rules that govern how people interact with one another and the environment around them. It ensures safety and security of all citizens by reinforcement and punishment for those who disobey it. The creation of laws are an integral part of creating a safe and civilized society, however, it is an imperfect system. Because laws are made by the government, in a corrupt governmental system laws created are often unjust. An exemplification of this are the Nuremberg Laws created by Hitler's Nazi government in Germany of 1935. These laws were legally discriminatory and anti-Sematic against Jewish German citizens, abolishing their rights they previously had. The Nuremberg laws also concerned Non-Jewish citizens, and called it their duty to report their Jewish neighbours and take part in anti-Sematic discrimination. There were many non-Jewish German citizens who approved of this prejudice and obeyed these unjust laws by outwardly committing hateful acts towards the Jewish population. However, obeying an unjust law does not always mean that one approves of it. During the reign of the Taliban in Afghanistan, laws were created that eradicated the right women had to an education. Girls above the age of eight were banned from receiving instruction to prevent cross-gender contact. Women in Afghanistan who wanted to pursue an education and possibly a career could not do so. Although these women did not approve of the unjust law that took away their right to an education, they had no choice but to obey it due to the punishment they may face if they did not. The question that remains is what would determine when disobeying a law is justified. One is justified in disobeying a law only when the law is discriminatory against a specific group of people by treating them as subordinates and taking away their human rights. Organizations and people who assisted Jews during the Nazi regime in Germany and women during the Taliban reign in Afghanistan were justified in disobeying the unjust laws created by the prejudiced government that ran the nation. When the legal system is discriminatory, it is justifiable to disobey a law if one is doing it in order to rid of the discrimination and to establish a safe and equal society for all. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thanks for taking the time to do this =) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genemo Posted June 15, 2011 Report Share Posted June 15, 2011 Why would you ask that? I'm not asking for extra work from him. lol no offense I'm just curious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaInhaler Posted June 15, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 15, 2011 -clicked- I just wanted to know if you'd be willing to give feedback on an essay without grading it? I think you give good feedback, but I'm skeptical about the letter grades you give. Of the essays I have graded, was there an error in my scoring? Did you read the entire first post in this thread? There is a lot of information about my methods and caveat emptor. For a live MCAT given by the AAMC, actual scoring is done by a human grader and a computer grader. You are to write two essays, and each essay is read and scored twice, once by the human grader, and once by the computer grader. You are given four scores, from 1 to 6, and these scores are converted to a letter grade from J to T. You take the average of the four scores to get a number between 1 to 6 and convert: 1=J, 1.5=K, 2=L, 2.5=M, 3=N, 3.5=O, 4=P, 4.5=Q, 5=R, 5.5=S, 6=T I have estimated a letter score based on the one essay written. It is not as accurate as four measurements across two essays, but it is a decent estimate. An applicant to the Guild was given a score last year on a live MCAT. I graded one of her essays without knowing that she had already taken the MCAT, and the score I gave out closely matched what she had gotten the previous year on the live MCAT. I won't give the exact score, but to illustrate with a hypothetical score: she received a Q according to the AAMC graders and I graded her essay a Q/R. A year had elapsed so perhaps her writing skills had improved slightly since her last live MCAT. Another essay in this thread was given a T by a TPR grader. I had an S in mind. I had told the member not to doubt the mark given because I knew it would either be an S or a T. There was another essay in this thread that was in the R/S range. I had given an R just to be conservative. You can have a look through that essay, and I'm sure you will agree that the essay is worth at least a 4.5. If you don't trust my scoring, you can wait until Prep101 comes by these forums again which will be soon. They offer a free grading service that is done by two of their staff who are also teachers for their MCAT prep course. If you want to proceed with grading in my thread, I can contact Roxanna89 (Post#4), and (M)erk, who is also a medical student who scored perfect on the Writing Sample and near perfect on the Verbal Reasoning section to offer their opinions. The grades that they give may well be the same as what I give, or they could be higher or lower. Then you can choose to ignore my score and take theirs, or you can average all of the scores. It's upto you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamone Posted June 15, 2011 Report Share Posted June 15, 2011 Thank you for your response; it's much more elaborate than what I had in mind My primary concern was one which you addressed in the first post: that you rarely give out high scores. I looked through some of the most recent pages, and I've rarely seen you award a Q or higher, even though about 40% of MCAT writers get a Q or higher on the live exam. Ultimately, I just don't want to be enticed into over-preparing for the writing sample if I was going to meet my goals anyway, and could have spent more time on the other sections. I hope you don't take this the wrong way though. I think you're providing a great service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.