McGraw-Hill Education SAT 2017 Edition (Mcgraw Hill's Sat) (2016)

CHAPTER 6

THE SAT ESSAY: ANALYZING ARGUMENTS

1. Understand the Analytical Task
2. Use the “Three-Pass Approach”
3. Organize Your Thoughts
4. Write the Essay

Sample Essay

The SAT Essay

What is the SAT Essay?

The SAT includes an optional 50-minute Essay assignment designed to assess your

proficiency in writing a cogent and clear analysis of a challenging rhetorical essay written for a broad audience .

Should you choose to accept the challenge, the SAT Essay will be the fifth and final section of your test.

The SAT Essay assignment asks you to read a 650–750 word rhetorical essay (such as a New York Times op-ed about the economic pros and cons of using biofuels) and to write a well-organized response that

• demonstrates an understanding of the essay”s central ideas and important details
• analyzes its use of evidence, such as facts or examples, to support its claims
• critiques its use of reasoning to develop ideas to connect claims and evidence
• examines how it uses stylistic or persuasive elements, such as word choice or appeals to emotion, to add power to the ideas expressed

How is it used?

Many colleges use the SAT Essay in admissions or placement decisions. Many also regard it as an important indicator of essential skills for success in college, specifically, your ability to demonstrate understanding of complex reading assignments, to analyze arguments, and to express your thoughts in writing.

Sound intimidating? It”s not.

If you have mastered the analytical reading skills discussed in Chapter 5 , you already have a strong start on tackling the SAT Essay, since strong active reading of the source text is the first and most important step in the analytical writing task. There are four rules to success on the SAT Essay, and the 13 lessons in this chapter will give you the knowledge and practice you need to master all of them.

Understand the Analytical Task

Lesson 1: Fifty minutes

The SAT Essay assesses your proficiency in reading, analysis, and writing. You are given 50 minutes to read an argumentative essay and write an analysis that demonstrates your comprehension of the essay”s primary and secondary ideas and your understanding of its use of evidence, language, reasoning, and rhetorical or literary elements to support those ideas. You must support your claims with evidence from the text and use critical reasoning to evaluate its rhetorical effectiveness.

So what should you do with those 50 minutes?

Reading: 15–20 minutes

Although 15–20 minutes may seem like a long time to devote to reading a 750-word essay, remember that you must do more than simply read the essay. You must comprehend , analyze , and critique it. In other words, you must master the “Three-Pass Approach” that we will practice in lessons 4–6. This is a fairly advanced reading technique, and you will need to devote substantial time to practicing it. Even once you”ve mastered it, you will still need to set aside 15–20 minutes on the SAT Essay section to read and annotate the passage thoroughly.

Organizing: 10–15 minutes

Your next task is to gather the ideas from your analyses and use them to formulate a thesis and structure for a five- or six-paragraph essay. If you have performed your first task properly and have completed your “Three-Pass” analysis, creating an outline will be much easier. We will discuss these tasks in lessons 7 and 8.

Your thesis should summarize the thesis of the essay and its secondary ideas, describe the author”s main stylistic and rhetorical elements, and provide an insightful critique of the essay.

Take your time with this process, too. Don”t make the mistake of writing your essay before you have articulated a thoughtful guiding question and outlined the essay as a whole.

Writing: 20–25 minutes

Next, of course, you have to write your easy. To get a high score, your essay must provide an eloquent introduction and conclusion, articulate a precise central claim about the essay, be well organized, show a logical and cohesive progression of ideas, maintain a formal style and an objective tone, and show a strong command of language. But if you”ve followed these steps, which we will explore in more detail below, the essay will flow naturally and easily from your analysis and outline.

Lesson 2: Learn the format of the SAT Essay

The passages you are asked to analyze present a point of view on a topic in the arts, sciences, politics, or culture. They address a broad audience, express nuanced views on complex subjects, and use evidence and logical reasoning to support their claims.

The Essay, should you choose to take it, is the fifth and final portion of the SAT. Here is a sample essay and prompt (from the diagnostic test in Chapter 2 ). Read it carefully to familiarize yourself with the instructions and format.

You have 50 minutes to read the passage and write an essay in response to the prompt provided below.

As you read the passage below, consider how Steven Pinker uses

• evidence, such as facts or examples, to support his claims
• reasoning to develop ideas and connect claims and evidence
• stylistic or persuasive elements, such as word choice or appeals to emotion, to add power to the ideas expressed

Adapted from Steven Pinker, “Mind Over Mass Media.” ©2010 by The New York Times. Originally published June 10, 2010.

New forms of media have always caused moral panics: the printing press, newspapers, paperbacks and television were all once denounced as threats to their consumers” brainpower and moral fiber.

So too with electronic technologies. PowerPoint, we”re told, is reducing discourse to bullet points. Search engines lower our intelligence, encouraging us to skim on the surface of knowledge rather than dive to its depths. Twitter is shrinking our attention spans.

But such panics often fail reality checks. When comic books were accused of turning juveniles into delinquents in the 1950s, crime was falling to record lows, just as the denunciations of video games in the 1990s coincided with the great American crime decline. The decades of television, transistor radios and rock videos were also decades in which I.Q. scores rose continuously.

For a reality check today, take the state of science, which demands high levels of brainwork and is measured by clear benchmarks of discovery. Today, scientists are never far from their e-mail and cannot lecture without PowerPoint. If electronic media were hazardous to intelligence, the quality of science would be plummeting. Yet discoveries are multiplying like fruit flies, and progress is dizzying. Other activities in the life of the mind, like philosophy, history and cultural criticism, are likewise flourishing.

Critics of new media sometimes use science itself to press their case, citing research that shows how “experience can change the brain.” But cognitive neuroscientists roll their eyes at such talk. Yes, every time we learn a fact or skill the wiring of the brain changes; it”s not as if the information is stored in the pancreas. But the existence of neural plasticity does not mean the brain is a blob of clay pounded into shape by experience.

Experience does not revamp the basic information-processing capacities of the brain. Speed-reading programs have long claimed to do just that, but the verdict was rendered by Woody Allen after he read War and Peace in one sitting: “It was about Russia.” Genuine multitasking, too, has been exposed as a myth, not just by laboratory studies but by the familiar sight of an SUV undulating between lanes as the driver cuts deals on his cell phone.

Moreover, the evidence indicates that the effects of experience are highly specific to the experiences themselves. If you train people to do one thing, they get better at doing that thing, but almost nothing else. Music doesn”t make you better at math; conjugating Latin doesn”t make you more logical; brain-training games don”t make you smarter. Accomplished people don”t bulk up their brains with intellectual calisthenics; they immerse themselves in their fields. Novelists read lots of novels; scientists read lots of science.

The effects of consuming electronic media are also likely to be far more limited than the panic implies. Media critics write as if the brain takes on the qualities of whatever it consumes, the informational equivalent of “you are what you eat.” As with primitive peoples who believe that eating fierce animals will make them fierce, they assume that watching quick cuts in rock videos turns your mental life into quick cuts or that reading bullet points and Twitter postings turns your thoughts into bullet points and Twitter postings.

Yes, the constant arrival of information packets can be distracting or addictive, especially to people with attention deficit disorder. But distraction is not a new phenomenon. The solution is not to bemoan technology but to develop strategies of self-control, as we do with every other temptation in life. Turn off e-mail or Twitter when you work, put away your BlackBerry at dinner time, ask your spouse to call you to bed at a designated hour.

And to encourage intellectual depth, don”t rail at PowerPoint or Google. It”s not as if habits of deep reflection, thorough research and rigorous reasoning ever came naturally to people. They must be acquired in special institutions, which we call universities, and maintained with constant upkeep, which we call analysis, criticism and debate. They are not granted by propping a heavy encyclopedia on your lap, nor are they taken away by efficient access to information on the Internet.

The new media have caught on for a reason. Knowledge is increasing exponentially; human brainpower and waking hours are not. Fortunately, the Internet and information technologies are helping us manage, search, and retrieve our collective intellectual output at different scales, from Twitter and previews to e-books and online encyclopedias. Far from making us stupid, these technologies are the only things that will keep us smart.

Write an essay in which you explain how Steven Pinker builds an argument to persuade his audience that new media are not destroying our moral and intellectual abilities. In your essay, analyze how Pinker uses one or more of the features listed in the box above (or features of your own choice) to strengthen the logic and persuasiveness of his argument. Be sure that your analysis focuses on the most relevant features of the passage.

Your essay should NOT explain whether you agree with Pinker”s claims, but rather explain how Pinker builds an argument to persuade his audience.

Lesson 3: Understand the scoring rubric

Your essay will be scored based on three criteria: reading , analysis , and writing . Two trained readers will give your essay a score of 1 to 4 on these three criteria, and your subscore for each criterion will be the sum of these two, that is, a score from 2 to 8. Here is the official rubric for all three criteria.

SAT Essay Scoring Rubric

Use the “Three-Pass Approach” (15–20 minutes)

Good analytical writing begins with strong analytical reading. In this first stage of the process, which should take between 15 and 20 minutes, take the “Three-Pass Approach” to analyzing the passage.

Lesson 4: First pass: Comprehend

First, read the passage to understand its primary and secondary ideas using the skills you learned in Chapter 5 . Ask: What is the central thesis, and what claims does the author make in each paragraph to support this thesis? Underline the key ideas, and annotate the paragraphs with very brief summaries.

Lesson 5: Second pass: Analyze

Next, read the passage again with a different question in mind: How does the author use evidence, reasoning, and rhetorical devices to support the central thesis and perhaps address potential counterarguments?

The College Board says that a strong essay must offer insightful analysis of the source text by examining the author”s use of evidence, reasoning, and/or stylistic elements . Therefore, you should know the common stylistic and rhetorical devices and recognize them when you see them.

In Chapter 5 , we discussed the 16 basic rhetorical and literary devices that can help you to better analyze college-level prose. Now let”s revisit them, and look at 17 more devices you should look for as you analyze argumentative essays.

33 Stylistic and Rhetorical Devices for Analysis of Rhetorical Essays

An ad hominem is an attack “on the person” rather than an attack of his or her ideas or reasoning. For example, Her political opinions can”t be trusted because she is just an actor is not an argument about the merits of her ideas, but merely an ad hominem.

Alliteration is the repetition of initial sounds in words to emphasize a rhetorical point. For instance, when John F. Kennedy referred to high standards of strength and sacrifice , he was using alliteration (notice the repeated “s” sounds) to draw his listeners into public service.

An allusion is an implicit reference to something, usually to a piece of literature or a well-known historical event. For example, the statement He”s gone down the rabbit hole is an allusion to the bizarre and fanciful episodes in the story Alice in Wonderland , and a reference to Benedict Arnold is an allusion to historical betrayal.

Anachronism is the intentional or accidental clash between things from different historical eras. It is a form of juxtaposition . For instance, calling the telegraph “the Twitter of the nineteenth century” not only elicits a sonic allusion (the taps and beeps of a telegraph sound like chirping), but also employs creative anachronism.

An analogy is an illustrative comparison between things that have a similar function or structure, usually with the use of the words like or as . For example, the levels of processing in a computer provide an analogy for understanding levels of processing in the human brain.

An anecdote is an illustrative story. For example, a story about a friend whose headache went away after he stood on his head for ten minutes is anecdotal evidence, not scientific evidence, for the health benefits of inversion.

An aphorism is a widely accepted truth. For example, the aphorism If it ain”t broke, don”t fix it can provide a concise argument against spending a lot of money on a new program. Aphorisms are also called maxims , adages , or proverbs .

An appeal to authority is a suggestion that the reader should agree with an idea because a respected authority happens to believe it. For example: The world”s greatest scientist, Sir Isaac Newton, believed that iron could be turned into gold, so who are we to question the idea?

An appeal to emotion (pathos) is an attempt to persuade the reader through an emotionally charged anecdote or allusion. For example, a story about an infuriating experience with an insurance salesman may be an effective way to argue against aggressive sales tactics.

Begging the question is the process of seeming to address a question without actually doing so, or assuming that the answer to a question is obvious when it is in fact not. For instance, asserting that putting more guns in the hands of good people can only deter crime is an example of begging the question. Specifically, it ignores the questions of how this would work, whether solid evidence supports the claim, and whether such a program might have dangerous unforeseen consequences.

Characterization is the use of imagery, diction, or description to convey a particular attitude toward a person, thing, or idea. For example, referring to your opponent”s proposal as a scheme characterizes it as being deceitful, harmful, or secretive.

Concession or qualification is the act of acknowledging a point of argument to the opposition, perhaps as a means of moderating your thesis or to preempt potential attacks that your opponent might use against you. For instance, an argument for a tax increase might include a concession that it would place an extra burden on taxpayers, and that those taxpayers might be rightfully concerned that those revenues are spent wisely, then appease these concerns by weighing the social benefits against any perceived burdens.

Connotation refers to the emotional, historic, and sensual associations of a word. Good writers are always aware of the connotations of a word as well as its literal meaning. For instance, a proposal for a tax increase might be described as an investment because this word connotes growth and progress.

Didacticism is basically a fancy word for teaching. In a rhetorical essay, an author may use didacticism to instruct the reader about a technical concept that the reader might need to know to understand a concept. For instance, in an essay about the differences between natural selection and the theory of “intelligent design,” an author might use didacticism to clarify the definition of terms like “scientific method,” “evidentiary standards,” and “hypothesis.”

Ethos is a class of rhetorical devices that attempt to elicit moral sentiments in order to make a point, especially when those moral sentiments correspond to a set of shared cultural beliefs. For instance, an author may refer to the American Spirit or traditional values as an appeal to ethos in order to inspire or persuade a reader.

A euphemism is a term that makes something seem more positive than it is. For example, salespersons or political canvassers often use the term courtesy call as a euphemism for an unwanted disruption, and military technicians use the term collateral damage as a euphemism for human casualties.

A foil is a person or thing that makes someone or something else seem better by contrast. For example, a person arguing against a tax increase might use the image of a bumbling, bureaucratic tax collector as a foil, whereas the foil for someone arguing for the tax increase might be the image a greedy billionaire who doesn”t care about the public good or about opportunities for the disadvantaged.

Guilt by association is largely regarded as a rhetorical fallacy but is frequently used in an attempt to persuade readers against an adversary. It is a fallacy because being mere association does not itself imply agreement or similarity. For instance, if a teacher mistrusts you simply because she knows that you hang around with friends who have cheated on tests, she is smearing you with guilt by association.

Hyperbole is deliberate exaggeration for persuasive effect. For example, saying that Molly”s comma usage is a catastrophe is almost certainly hyperbole.

Imagery is the use of vivid sensory impressions in order to elicit a feeling like anger, peacefulness, beauty, wistfulness, sympathy, or the like. Keats uses visual and sonic imagery in his ode To the Autumn when he writes full-grown lambs loud bleat from hilly bourn; Hedge-crickets sing; and now with treble soft; The redbreast whistles from a garden-croft .

Induction is the process of drawing or implying broad generalizations from a few examples. Overgeneralization is an inductive fallacy. For instance, drawing the conclusion from a few encounters with driving instructors that all DMV workers are impatient is an act of induction that many would consider an unfair overgeneralization.

Irony is a deliberate reversal of expectations in order to surprise a reader, often for persuasive effect. For example, Christopher Hitchens justified his attitude toward free will by using irony: I believe in free will, because I have no other choice .

Logical analysis (logos) is the examination of an argument in terms of its logical support (or lack thereof). An author might use logos to refute a claim like all politicians are liars by pointing out an honest politician (counterexample ) or by showing that such a claim does not follow from any logical premises ( non sequitur ). On the other hand, an author might use logos to support a claim by showing that it follows necessarily from previously accepted premises ( deduction ) or that its falsehood would lead to an absurd situation ( indirect proof or reductio ad absurdum ) or that it follows a well-accepted pattern ( induction ).

A metaphor is an application of a word or phrase to something it doesn”t literally apply to. For example, calling a refusal a slap in the face uses metaphor to emphasize its harshness.

Rhetorical parallelism is the use of repeated grammatical form to emphasize a point. For example, John F. Kennedy used parallelism in his inaugural address when he said we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty .

Rhetorical paradox is the use of a logically self-contradictory statement to make a point. Oscar Wilde is known for such masterful examples of rhetorical paradox as The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about and I can resist anything but temptation .

Parody is comical and exaggerated imitation. Tina Fey is famous for her parodies of former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin. Many writers of persuasive essays use parody to mock the positions of their opponents.

The persona a writer adopts is the voice that he or she uses to establish his or her standing or personality in the argument. For instance, an author might create a very gentle and casual persona (Don”t you hate it when … ) or a more formal and forceful persona (Our current political discourse must change if we are to address the existential crises our nation faces … ), each of which has its advantages and disadvantages in persuading readers.

Personification is the attribution of personal qualities to something that is not a person. For example, we are using rhetorical personification when we say that an idea is on its last legs or gave its last gasp .

A polemic is a forceful and controversial argument against a widely held position. For instance, any forceful argument against the virtue of compassion or the benefit of hard work would be considered a polemic because these values are widely accepted and have a history of forceful argumentation behind them. Christopher Hitchens and Jonathan Swift are some famous polemicists.

A simile is a comparison using like or as . For instance, Irena Dunn used rhetorical simile when she said A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle .

A straw man is an unfair misrepresentation of an opponent”s position so that it can be more easily refuted. It is a common and dishonest logical fallacy. For instance, if one wanted to refute the position that teens should be taught about responsible contraception use in order to prevent both unwanted pregnancies and the spread of potentially lethal diseases , one might replace this position with a straw man position: my opponent wants to give all of your kids condoms so they can go out and have as much sex as they want without worrying about any consequences . This recharacterization of the original position is a straw man because it misstates not only the content of the actual proposal, but also the intention of the program and the consideration being given to the consequences of potentially dangerous activities.

An understatement encourages the reader to embrace a point by underemphasizing its intensity, which is taken to be obvious. For instance, it”s an understatement to suggest that Donald Trump is a little self-absorbed .

This list is by no means exhaustive, but it provides a solid framework for analyzing the passage. In your second read-through, keep it simple. Just underline the sentences or phrases that use these devices, and categorize the devices in the margin.

Read the annotations in the sample analysis below and see how each underlined portion represents that particular device. Train yourself to see these devices in all of the rhetorical essays you read: newspaper op-eds, long form essays, and even your own papers.

This analysis is a critical step in writing the SAT Essay. As the scoring rubric indicates, your essay should offer a thorough, well-considered evaluation of the author”s use of evidence, reasoning, and/or stylistic and persuasive elements .

The rubric also indicates that a good essay will contain relevant, sufficient, and strategically chosen support for claims or points made . This means you must give quotations from the text that show where the author uses these particular devices and stylistic elements .

Lesson 6: Third pass: Critique

In your third pass, read the passage one more time and ask: How effectively does the essay use reasoning, evidence, and the stylistic and rhetorical devices I just identified? Again, indicate your thoughts in the margins.

According to the College Board, a top-scoring essay must “offer a thorough, well-considered evaluation of the author”s use of evidence, reasoning, and/or stylistic elements.” That is, it is not enough to point out these elements; you must also evaluate them. A strong essay must also “focus consistently on those features of the text that are most relevant to addressing the task,” that is, it must demonstrate that you can distinguish especially relevant points and devices from incidental points and devices.

Organize Your Thoughts (10–15 minutes)

After you”ve finished your three passes, it”s time to organize your thoughts. You need to have something interesting to write about and a coherent way to express it. This stage of the process involves constructing a thesis and outlining the entire essay .

Lesson 7: Construct a precise, thorough, and insightful thesis

According to the College Board, a good thesis for your SAT Essay is precise , thorough , and insightful . That is, it conveys a thoughtful central idea that demonstrates that you (1) thoroughly understand the text, (2) have analyzed its essential rhetorical and stylistic elements, and (3) have evaluated those elements for effectiveness.

Take your time when composing your thesis. Choose your words carefully and make sure you capture the key elements listed above. You will probably need more than one sentence to accomplish everything you need in a good thesis paragraph. Consider this first draft for our thesis:

Draft 1

In his essay, “Mind Over Mass Media,” Steven Pinker looks at new forms of media. His thesis is about the reality of modern social media and the Internet. He talks about the misconceptions that cultural critics have about the relationship between modern media and the human brain .

Is it precise?

Analyze your sentences for precision by “trimming” them as we discussed in Chapter 4 , Lesson 3. Trimming reduces a sentence to its core , that is, the phrases that convey the essential ideas. When we do this with our first draft, we get “… Steven Pinker looks at new forms. … His thesis is about the reality. … He talks about the misconceptions. …” Are the verbs strong and clear? Are the objects concrete and precise? Not really. Let”s look back at our notes and use quotations from the passage to make these sentences more precise.

Draft 2

In his essay, “Mind Over Mass Media,” Steven Pinker looks at examines the “moral panics” about the supposed moral and cognitive declines caused by new forms of media. His thesis is about the reality of modern social media and the Internet that “such panics often fail reality checks.” He talks about effectively analyzes the misconceptions that cultural critics have about the relationship between modern media and the human brain .

Notice that this revision better specifies what Pinker is examining in his essay by more precisely articulating his thesis, even including a quotation.

Is it thorough?

Although our second draft provides more detail about Pinker”s thesis, this draft still lacks detail about his essay”s rhetorical and stylistic elements. It could be more thorough. Let”s look back at our notes and add some details about these elements.

Draft 3

In his essay, “Mind Over Mass Media,” Steven Pinker examines the “moral panics” about the supposed moral and cognitive declines caused by new forms of media. His thesis, is that “such panics often fail reality checks,” is supported with historical examples, logical analysis, illustrative images, and touches of humor . He provides scientific context for his claims, and effectively analyzes the misconceptions that cultural critics have about the relationship between modern media and the human brain .

Note that this revision more thoroughly explains how Pinker makes his points by specifying rhetorical and stylistic devices.

Is it insightful?

An insightful essay provides a unique perspective on and evaluation of the source text. Although the SAT Essay instructions say that your response should NOT explain whether you agree with the author”s claims , the official SAT Essay scoring rubric states that a high-scoring essay must offer a thorough, well-considered evaluation of the author”s use of evidence, reasoning, and/or stylistic elements, and/or features of the student”s own choosing . In other words, don”t say whether you agree with the source text, but explain how well it performs the persuasive task .

Think of it this way: a good movie or restaurant reviewer shouldn”t just say “Don”t go to that movie because I hate car chases,” or “Don”t go to that restaurant because I don”t like spicy food,” because a reader might actually like car chases or spicy food. Instead, a good reviewer describes the cinematic aspects of the movie or culinary aspects of the food to help the reader make a better decision. Similarly, your essay should give your reader enough information to decide for himself or herself whether Pinker”s essay is strong.

Our current draft is lacking some of these insights, so let”s add a few.

Draft 4

In his essay, “Mind Over Mass Media,” Steven Pinker examines the “moral panics” about the supposed moral and cognitive declines caused by new forms of media. His essay provides a measure of balance to our sometimes hysterical discussions of social media and instantaneous digital information. His thesis, that “such panics often fail reality checks,” is supported with historical examples, logical analysis, illustrative images, and touches of humor. He provides scientific context for his claims, and effectively analyzes the misconceptions that cultural critics have about the relationship between modern media and the human brain. Although his argument could have been bolstered with more specific scientific support, his essay as a whole effectively argues for a reprieve from the hysteria about intellectual and moral decline allegedly caused by Twitter and Facebook.

Notice that this revision insightfully evaluates how effectively Pinker makes his points.

Lesson 8: Outline your essay

Once you”ve composed your thesis, outline the rest of your essay. Plan to write between five and seven paragraphs.

Our thesis paragraph draws the reader in by beginning to answer the question How does Steven Pinker”s Essay, “Mind Over Mass Media,” establish a point of view about the effects of modern media and information technologies?by summarizing Pinker”s thesis, describing his rhetorical and stylistic techniques, and evaluating the effectiveness of his writing.

The rest of the essay should focus on supporting those points and discussing their relevance .

Outline

1. Pinker”s essay examines the “moral panics” about new media and information technologies supposedly causing cognitive and moral decline, and argues for a reprieve from the hysteria.
2. Pinker effectively uses historical examples to support his thesis.
3. Pinker uses logical analysis to refute the opposing viewpoint.
4. Pinker uses psychological research to explain how misguided our worries about new media are.
5. Pinker attempts to refute his critics with an analogy between modern critics and the thinking of ancient peoples.
6. Pinker provides constructive advice for those prone to distraction by new media.
7. Pinker concludes with a hopeful view of new media and information technologies.

Write the Essay (20–25 minutes)

Lesson 9: Use strong verbs

According to the College Board, a strong essay demonstrates a highly effective command of language . As we discussed in Lesson 7, strong sentences contain strong verbs . Strengthen your verbs by minimizing weak verbs(like to be , to have , to make , and to do ) and minimizing passive verbs .

Minimize weak verbs by upgrading “lurkers”

Look at a recent essay you”ve written and circle all of the verbs. Are more than one-third of your verbs to be verbs (is , are , was , were )? If so, strengthen your verbs. You cannot maintain a strong discussion if you overuse weak verbs like to be , to have , and to do .

To strengthen your sentences, upgrade any lurkers —the words in your sentence that aren”t verbs, but should be. Consider this sentence:

This action is in violation of our company”s confidentiality policy .

It revolves around a very weak verb. But the noun violation is a lurker. Let”s upgrade it to verb status:

This action violates our company”s confidentiality policy .

Notice how this small change “punches up” the sentence.

Here are some more examples of how upgrading the lurkers can strengthen a sentence:

Here, we”ve upgraded the lurkers reflective (adjective) and having studied (participle). Notice that this change not only strengthens the verbs and clarifies the sentence, but also unclutters the sentence by eliminating the prepositional phrases on the test , of the fact , and of my not having studied .

We”ve upgraded the lurkers ignoring (gerund) and resentful (adjective). Again, notice that strengthening the sentence also unclutters it of unnecessary prepositional phrases.

We”ve upgraded the lurkers to overeat (infinitive) and lack (noun).

Activate your passive verbs

What is the difference between these two sentences?

The rebel army made its bold maneuver under the cloak of darkness .

The bold maneuver was made by the rebel army under the cloak of darkness .

These two sentences say essentially the same thing, but the first sentence is in the active voice whereas the second is in the passive voice . In the active voice , the subject of the sentence is the “actor” of the verb, but in the passive voice , the subject is not the actor. (The maneuver did not make anything, so maneuver is not the actor of the verb made in the second sentence, even though it is the subject.) Notice that the second sentence is weaker for two reasons: it”s heavier (it has more words) and it”s slower (it takes more time to get to the point).

But there”s an even better reason to avoid passive voice verbs: they can make you sound deceitful. Consider this classic passive-voice sentence:

Mistakes were made .

Who made them? Thanks to the passive voice, we don”t need to say. We can avoid responsibility.

Although you may sometimes need to use the passive voice , avoid it when you can. The active voice is clearer and stronger, and it encourages you to articulate essential details (like “who did it”) for your reader.

Lesson 10: Use concrete and personal nouns

Strong writers use concrete and personal nouns , even when discussing abstract ideas. Readers identify more strongly with people and things than they do with abstractions like being and potential .

You may have noticed that strengthening our verbs in Lesson 9 also had the extra benefit of strengthening our nouns:

In the first sentence, 75% of the nouns (failure , fact , and having studied ) are abstract, but in the second, the nouns and pronouns (I , test , I ) are personal and concrete.

By upgrading the gerund ignoring to a verb, we reduced the number of abstract nouns in the sentence by 50%. Even better, we upgraded the subject from an abstract noun (fact ) to a concrete and personal one (protestors ).

Lesson 11: Explain and connect your ideas

According to the College Board, a strong essay demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the source text and demonstrates a logical and effective progression of ideas . Therefore, explain each of your ideas and connectthem with each other and with your central claim.

Explain your ideas

Don”t merely state your ideas: explain them clearly enough so that your reader can easily follow your analysis.

Good explanations often include words like by (our team slowed down the game by using a full-court press ), because (we won because we executed our game plan flawlessly ), or therefore (we slowed down their offense; therefore, we were able to manage the game more effectively ).

Be careful, however, of overusing using phrases like because of and due to . These phrases tend to produce weak explanations because they link to noun phrases rather than clauses . Clauses are more explanatory because they include verbs and therefore convey more information.

Notice that avoiding the of forces the writer to provide a clause instead of just a noun phrase and therefore give a more substantial explanation.

Connect your ideas with clear cross-references

In Chapter 4 , Lesson 8, we discussed the importance of making strong cross-references in analytical or rhetorical essays, that is, connecting ideas to establish a clear chain of reasoning. Use your pronouns carefully , particularly when they refer to ideas mentioned in previous sentences. Make sure your pronouns have clear antecedents.

Consider these sentences:

Davis makes the important point that defense lawyers sometimes must represent clients whom they know are guilty, not only because these lawyers take an oath to uphold their clients” right to an adequate defense, but also because firms cannot survive financially if they accept only the obviously innocent as clients. This troubles many who want to pursue criminal law .

What does the pronoun This in the second sentence refer to? What troubles many who want to study criminal law ? Is it the fact that Davis is making this point? Is it the moral implications of lawyers representing the guilty? Is it the technical difficulty of lawyers representing the guilty? Is it the financial challenges of maintaining a viable law practice? Is it all of these? The ambiguity of this pronoun obscures the discussion and makes the reader work harder to follow it. Clarify your references so that your train of thought is easy to follow.

Davis makes the important point that defense lawyers sometimes must represent clients whom they know are guilty, not only because these lawyers take an oath to uphold their clients” right to an adequate defense, but also because firms cannot survive financially if they accept only the obviously innocent as clients . Such moral and financial dilemmas trouble many who want to pursue criminal law .

Connect your ideas with logical transitions

As you move from idea to idea—within a sentence, between sentences, or between paragraphs—always consider the logical relationship between these ideas, and make these connections clear to your reader. The logical “connectors” include words and phrases like

Lesson 12: Choose your words carefully

According to the College Board, a strong essay demonstrates precise word choice . Chapter 3 , “The Language of Ideas,” provides exactly the vocabulary you need to articulate your ideas clearly and precisely. Spend some time with the vocabulary in Chapter 3 to familiarize yourself with words like consensus , conjecture , criteria , comprehensive , cohesive , circumscribe , and construe that are at the heart of the “analytical task.”

Choose precise words over pretentious ones. You won”t get extra points for using obscure words when you could use simple ones.

Lesson 13: Pay attention to sentence structure

According to the College Board, a strong essay uses an effective variety of sentence structures . Short sentences have impact; long sentences have weight. Good writers realize this and structure their sentences to fit their purpose.

Consider this paragraph:

Medical interns are overworked. They are constantly asked to do a lot with very little sleep. They are chronically exhausted as a result. They can make mistakes that are dangerous and even potentially deadly .

What is so dreary about it? The sentences all have the same structure. Consider this revision:

Constantly overworked and given very little time to sleep, medical interns are chronically exhausted. These conditions can lead them to make dangerous and even deadly mistakes .

Your readers won”t appreciate your profound ideas if they are stupefied by unvarying sentences. Now consider these sentences:

Gun advocates tell us that “guns don”t kill people; people kill people.” On the surface, this statement seems obviously true. However, analysis of the assumptions and implications of this statement shows clearly that even its most ardent believers can”t possibly believe it .

Now consider this alternative:

Gun advocates tell us that “guns don”t kill people; people kill people.” On the surface, this statement seems obviously true. It”s not .

Which is better? The first provides more information, but the second provides more impact. Good writers always think about the length of their sentences. Long sentences are often necessary for articulating complex ideas, but short sentences are better for emphasizing important points. Choose wisely.

Sample Essay

Analysis of Pinker”s “Mind Over Mass Media”

In his essay, “Mind Over Mass Media,” Steven Pinker examines the “moral panics” about the supposed moral and cognitive declines caused by new forms of media. His essay provides a measure of balance to our sometimes hysterical discussions of social media and instantaneous digital information. His thesis, that “such panics often fail reality checks,” is supported with historical examples, logical analysis, illustrative images, and touches of humor. He provides scientific context for his claims and effectively analyzes the misconceptions that cultural critics have about the relationship between modern media and the human brain. Although his argument could have been bolstered with more specific scientific support, his essay as a whole effectively argues for a reprieve from the hysteria about intellectual and moral decline allegedly caused by Twitter and Facebook.

Pinker addresses common misconceptions with historical evidence: “When comic books were accused of turning juveniles into delinquents in the 1950s, crime was falling to record lows, just as the denunciations of video games in the 1990s coincided with the great American crime decline.” Here, Pinker is suggesting that sociological and psychological evidence refutes claims of social decline.

Pinker effectively uses indirect proof or “reductio ad absurdum” in his third paragraph: “If electronic media were hazardous to intelligence, the quality of science would be plummeting. Yet discoveries are multiplying like fruit flies, and progress is dizzying. Other activities in the life of the mind, like philosophy, history and cultural criticism, are likewise flourishing.” Unfortunately, Pinker does not provide substantial evidence to bolster these claims. He fails to address the common counterclaim that much of the “science” published on the Internet is flimsy, and the “cultural criticism” lazy.

Pinker then grounds his argument with reference to evidence from psychological research. To Pinker, the claim that “information can change the brain” is facile (“it”s not as if the information is stored in the pancreas”) and misleading (“the existence of neural plasticity does not mean the brain is a blob of clay pounded into shape by experience”). Rather, Pinker suggests, “the effects of experience are highly specific to the experiences themselves … Music doesn”t make you better at math; conjugating Latin doesn”t make you more logical; brain-training games don”t make you smarter.” Unfortunately, Pinker here seems to mistake assertion for argumentation. He is directly contradicting the claims of thousands of music and Latin teachers, as well as dozens of Lumosity commercials. But he is only gainsaying. Here again, we might expect some data to support his points.

Next, Pinker attempts to refute cultural critics by drawing an analogy between their reasoning and the faulty reasoning of “primitive peoples” who believe that “eating fierce animals will make them fierce.” He likens this to the thinking of modern observers who believe that “reading bullet points and Twitter postings turns your thoughts into bullet points and Twitter postings.” But of course just because one line of reasoning parallels another does not mean that both are equally incorrect. Here again, Pinker”s argument would benefit from information about the actual cognitive effects of reading Twitter feeds.

Next, Pinker provides a concession to his opponents: “Yes, the constant arrival of information packets can be distracting or addictive, especially to people with attention deficit disorder.” But here again, even in conceding a point, Pinker doesn”t quite offer the information a reader might want: How significant is this distraction or addiction, and does it have any harmful long-term effects? We don”t get this information, but we do get some welcome practical advice: “Turn off e-mail or Twitter when you work …” We get even more substantial advice in the next paragraph: to cultivate “intellectual depth” we must avail ourselves of “special institutions, which we call universities” and engage in “analysis, criticism, and debate.” But why, a reader might wonder, should we moderate our use of electronic media if it doesn”t have any real harmful effects, and indeed, as he says in his conclusion, these media “are the only things that will keep us smart?”

Finally, Pinker ends with a broader perspective and a note of hope: “the Internet and information technologies are helping us manage, search, and retrieve our collective intellectual output … Far from making us stupid, these technologies are the only things that will keep us smart.” Perhaps Pinker is right, but his argument would be stronger with more substantial quantitative evidence and more direct refutation of our real concerns about how the Internet might be changing our brains.

Scoring

Reading—8 (both readers gave it a score of 4 out of 4)

This response demonstrates extremely thorough comprehension of Pinker”s essay through skillful use of summary, paraphrase, and direct quotations. The author summarizes Pinker”s central thesis and modes of persuasion (His thesis, that “such panics often fail reality checks,” is supported with historical examples, logical analysis, illustrative images, and touches of humor ) and shows a clear understanding of Pinker”s supporting ideas and overall tone (He provides historical and scientific context for his claims and effectively analyzes the misconceptions that cultural critics have about the relationship between modern media and the human brain . … Pinker ends with a broader perspective and a note of hope ). Each quotation is accompanied by insightful commentary that demonstrates that this author thoroughly understands Pinker”s central and secondary ideas, and even recognizes when Pinker seems occasionally to fall short of his own purpose.

Analysis—8 (both readers gave it a score of 4 out of 4)

This response provides a thoughtful and critical analysis of Pinker”s essay and demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the analytical task. The author has identified Pinker”s primary modes of expression (historical examples , logical analysis, illustrative images, and touches of humor ) and has even provided a detailed examination of Pinker”s preferred logical method, reductio ad absurdum, with a discussion of several examples. Perhaps even more impressively, the author indicates where Pinker”s evidence falls short, providing critical analysis and suggesting alternatives (Unfortunately, Pinker does not provide substantial evidence to bolster these claims. He fails to address the common counterclaim that much of the “science” published on the Internet is flimsy, and the “cultural criticism” lazy . … Pinker here seems to mistake assertion for argumentation . … Here again, Pinker”s argument would benefit from information about the actual cognitive effects of reading Twitter feeds ). Overall, the author”s analysis of Pinker”s essays demonstrates a thorough understanding not only of the rhetorical task that Pinker has set for himself, but also the means by which it is best accomplished.

Writing—8 (both readers gave it a score of 4 out of 4)

This response shows a masterful use of language and sentence structure to establish a clear and insightful central claim (Although his argument could have been bolstered with more specific scientific support, his essay as a whole effectively argues for a reprieve from the hysteria about intellectual and moral decline allegedly caused by Twitter and Facebook ). The response maintains a consistent focus on this central claim and supports it with a well-developed and cohesive analysis of Pinker”s essay. The author demonstrates effective verb choice (effectively analyzes the misconceptions . … He likens this to the thinking of modern observers ) and a strong grasp of relevant analytical terms such as reduction ad absurdum , facile , sociological and psychological evidence , counterclaim , assertion , argumentation , and gainsaying . The response is well developed, progressing from general claim to specific analysis to considered evaluation. Largely free from grammatical error, this response demonstrates strong command of language and proficiency in writing.