Read my essay

[cinderly]

See, my main problem is that I am just not a speed writer one bit. I'm the kind of person that writes 10 rough drafts on 10 separate days before I turn in a paper. I really have difficulty brain storming my ideas, making an outline, writing the draft, and editing, all in 45 minutes.

An outline is not a masterpiece. For this purpose, it's closer to jotting notes as you read than a rough draft. You want to get down the things you will absolutely kick yourself over if you forget them. Create it as you read/reread the passage.

An outline for your essay would be something like this. (I've spelled everything out, but there would be abbreviations, cross-outs, and emphatic underlines in the paper version):

[INDENT]Vote for corrupt gov? (YES!!)
- no vote? more corruption
- flawed gov, but limited power
- duty & right
- no control if no vote

**free speech**
- greatest blessing
- interest groups, protests, other?!
- vote as speech (vote counts! yay!)
- no reelection

"of the people"
- power stays in hands of many
- Founding Fathers

absolute power = absolute corruption
- corruption easy (small stakeholder)
- no dissenting opinions --> OWN beliefs guide
[/INDENT]

[gufomel]

I see what you're saying. One of my problems though is that I have trouble thinking of ideas before I start writing. For instance, I had not thought of using the argument that by not voting we do not take advantage of our freedom of speech, until part way through the essay.

[gufomel]

Thanks again for everyone's help. I've written another essay that I'll type below. I felt like this one was somewhat easier to write than the last, just because we had talked about a few of these ideas in my Anthropology class a few days ago. I still see a lot of problems with it, but since I'm just going for a passing grade, I'd be interested to see if you all think there is enough improvement over my last one.

Prompt: "We are all influenced in lasting ways - whether positive or negative - by the particular kind of community in which we grow up."

"It is often debated whether or not the community we grow up in influences our lives in lasting ways. I believe it certainly does. Our upbringing plays a vital role in affecting our attitude and personality, our future potential as adults, and how we view society and the world.

Numerous scientific studies have been done to test the affects of nature versus nurture on people's personalities. Nature is our inherited traits - those we are born with. Nurture is our learned traits - those we develop during our early childhood. In one study, several sets of twins were separated at birth. They grew up in different homes, in different communities, and even in different parts of the world. After reaching adulthood, one pair of twins wound up finding each other. While recounting their story later, they said that even though their physical traits were identical, their values and personalities were extremely different.

What type of community we grow up in also has a great affect on the number of opportunities we have to better ourselves. Children raised in middle-class to upper-class communities often receive a strong education. Though they may not initially be naturally gifted, they are provided with many chances to improve. On the other hand, children who grow up in lower-class communities often get stuck in situations they are not able to easily get out of. Even if they have strong natural abilities that could lead them to a well-paying job, they rarely have the education or guidance to develop those talents.

The community we grow up in plays a role in how we view society as well. An isolated tribe in Africa knows only its land, its economy, and its people because of limited contact with the outside world. In contrast, people in a prospering first world country such as our own are in constant relation with all types of surroundings and ways of life - whether through direct contact or the media. Unlike the tribe in Africa which knows only its own culture, we as Americans have much more knowledge at our disposal to make informed decision about the world.

It is important to keep in mind that our life is not set in stone just because of where we grow up. We should always do our best to make the most of our lives. However, we can be certain that upbringing does affect our personal values and attitude, the opportunities we will receive in life, and our view of society."

[studyhard]

Thanks again for everyone's help. I've written another essay that I'll type below. I felt like this one was somewhat easier to write than the last, just because we had talked about a few of these ideas in my Anthropology class a few days ago. I still see a lot of problems with it, but since I'm just going for a passing grade, I'd be interested to see if you all think there is enough improvement over my last one.

Prompt: "We are all influenced in lasting ways - whether positive or negative - by the particular kind of community in which we grow up."

"It is often debated whether or not the community we grow up in influences our lives in lasting ways. I believe it certainly does. Our upbringing plays a vital role in affecting our attitude and personality, our future potential as adults, and how we view society and the world.

Numerous scientific studies have been done to test the affects of nature versus nurture on people's personalities. Nature is our inherited traits - those we are born with. Nurture is our learned traits - those we develop during our early childhood. In one study, several sets of twins were separated at birth. They grew up in different homes, in different communities, and even in different parts of the world. After reaching adulthood, one pair of twins wound up finding each other. While recounting their story later, they said that even though their physical traits were identical, their values and personalities were extremely different.

What type of community we grow up in also has a great affect on the number of opportunities we have to better ourselves. Children raised in middle-class to upper-class communities often receive a strong education. Though they may not initially be naturally gifted, they are provided with many chances to improve. On the other hand, children who grow up in lower-class communities often get stuck in situations they are not able to easily get out of. Even if they have strong natural abilities that could lead them to a well-paying job, they rarely have the education or guidance to develop those talents.

The community we grow up in plays a role in how we view society as well. An isolated tribe in Africa knows only its land, its economy, and its people because of limited contact with the outside world. In contrast, people in a prospering first world country such as our own are in constant relation with all types of surroundings and ways of life - whether through direct contact or the media. Unlike the tribe in Africa which knows only its own culture, we as Americans have much more knowledge at our disposal to make informed decision about the world.

It is important to keep in mind that our life is not set in stone just because of where we grow up. We should always do our best to make the most of our lives. However, we can be certain that upbringing does affect our personal values and attitude, the opportunities we will receive in life, and our view of society."

GOOD JOB! MUCH BETTER!!!!!!!!!

This is a great improvement over the first one. Very nice work!!! I think an essay like that would do just fine!

[barcotta]

That strikes me as being 100-200X better. Seriously. I'm sure it helped to have recently learned concepts related to that topic, but it shows that you have the structure down and I think if you follow Cinderly's outlining advice you'll skate right through. Nice job.

[gufomel]

Ok...this is probably my last one as I will be taking my test tomorrow. It's probably not a very good one to end on though. It's a somewhat different type of prompt, and one that I think will be more like the one I will actually see on the test. I drew a complete blank on this one and could barely think of anything for about 5 minutes. I feel like I have the format down now, but my I don't feel like my arguments flow together well at all, and I'm not sure that it even makes much sense. I guess it will kind of just depend on what we were talking about earlier - whether the grade depends more on format or conetnt. Anyways, if ya'll are able to read over this final one and let me know what you think, I can use some of the things you tell me tomorrow.

Prompt: When Thomas Jefferson wrote The Declaration of Independence he claimed that “we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Write an essay stating support of or opposition to the argument that Jefferson was describing all human beings when he wrote “all men are created equal.” Be sure to use examples from Colonial life and philosophers who were contemporaries of Jefferson.

Essay: It is often debated whether or not Jefferson was describing all human beings when he wrote "all men are created equal." In order to answer this, we must look back to life in the Colonial period and what their views were on what constitutes someone as a human being. In a very narrow sense of the word, I believe Jefferson was including all human beings. However, in his narrowminded view, slaves, women, and men who did not own property were not to even be considered in this type of context.

Slaves were only to be thought of as property. They ahd no personal freedom and certainly no right to be considered human beings. When brought over on slave ships, there was no regard for their life. They were packed so tightly in a confined space that the majority of them died of diseases before even reaching American soil.

Women were certainly considered human beings when it came to things pertaining to the home. However, not one of the Founding Fathers would have had the thought even cross their mind that women have the mental capacity or ability to make governmental decisions. While in today's time we consider this to be absurd and discriminatory, it was a widely accepted view in the 1700's. I think this is why Jefferson was able to make the claim in all honesty that all men are created equal.

Finally, non-property owners were not included either because the idea at the time was that those who were not able to be prosperous in their personal lives, were not capable of making decisions for their country. If a man was not dedicated enough to secure some property for himself and his family, he certainly would not be devoted enough to his country to make wise decisions.

In conclusion, I do not believe Jefferson would have blatantly said that slaves, women, and non-property owners are not human beings. The argument can be made though that because it was so ingrained in his mind that these three groups were incapable of making important decisions, it never crossed his mind that he was not including them when he wrote "all men are created equal." He wrote it in all honesty.

[gufomel]

As I said, this one was extremely difficult for me to decide what to write about. I got caught right in the middle of which side to argue for. I really did not know how to go about arguing for the side that Jefferson did not mean that "all men are created equal" because that would mean that he was lying - which I don't think he was. So after 5 minutes of sitting there not writing anything, I decided to argue based on the 3 main types of people that have generally been discriminated against in our country.

This was kind of one of those types of things where you have an idea in your head but putting it all down on paper in 45 minutes in a logical way just makes it turn out confusing. Especially hard was trying to find a way to say that these people weren't even considered human beings.

[barcotta]

You're right--this one does appear to be a little trickier for you, but the form and grammar look pretty good to me. Here's what tripped me up:

However, not one of the Founding Fathers would have had the thought even cross their mind that women have the mental capacity or ability to make governmental decisions

I don't see where governmental decisions comes into play here. It appears to me that they want to know if you think Jefferson meant "men" literally, or was using "men" in place of "human beings."

If a man was not dedicated enough to secure some property for himself and his family, he certainly would not be devoted enough to his country to make wise decisions.

Here again is the "decision" concept. In the quote supplied, Jefferson wrote, "we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” I don't understand the expansion to decision making--governmental or otherwise. Of course, it was a few years ago that I took American History, and I'm sure you didn't just make up this concept. I just don't know if it has any relevance in response to this question. Let's see what the others think...

[gufomel]

Yea, you're right. I was having to rush the entire time just to get something on the paper, and kept going off topic.

[studyhard]

My overall impression is that it hangs together fairly well. Yes, you're off-topic at times, but you disguised it pretty well.

In this case, I don't think it's necessarily a problem to talk about ways in which women/slaves/non-property owners were maybe not considered equal--however, the problem lies with the fact that you used an example as a main point, instead of using the example to illustrate the main point. I think it would have been stronger if you said something like, "For instance, it appears that since women were not allowed to participate in governmental decisions, they were not viewed as being true "equals."

This one isn't as good as your second one, but I think it's much better than the first one. I'm sure you'll do great tomorrow!!!