ap English

follow files below 

easy assignment 

Evaluating Synthesis Sample Essays

SYNTHESIS ESSAY RUBRIC

SKILL: THESIS

SKILL: EVIDENCE & COMMENTARY

0

1

SKILL: SOPHISTICATION

0

1

Directions:
Find prompt and sources

here

. Review the sample synthesis essays

here
and grade them according to the AP rubric. Please provide specific examples and feedback.

Sample Essay #1

Thesis Grade: ____/1

Evidence & Commentary Grade: ____/4

Sophistication Grade: ____/1

1. What are the essay’s strengths (be specific)?

2. What are the essay’s areas of improvement (be specific)?

3. What is one piece of actionable feedback you would give the essay (be specific)?

Sample Essay #2

Thesis Grade: ____/1
Evidence & Commentary Grade: ____/4
Sophistication Grade: ____/1

4. What are the essay’s strengths (be specific)?

5. What are the essay’s areas of improvement (be specific)?

6. What is one piece of actionable feedback you would give the essay (be specific)?

Sample Essay #3

Thesis Grade: ____/1
Evidence & Commentary Grade: ____/4
Sophistication Grade: ____/1

7. What are the essay’s strengths (be specific)?

8. What are the essay’s areas of improvement (be specific)?

9. What is one piece of actionable feedback you would give the essay (be specific)?

Sample Synthesis Essays

Find prompt and sources

here

.

Sample Essay #1:

Penmanship is a practice that has held true throughout centuries of world history. Throughout its beginnings as pictographic scripts and its historical practical applications, penmanship has managed to connect people for as long as time can tell. Through letters via lovers via carrier pigeon or through signatures on legal documents, penmanship finds its place in society day in and day out. While to some, cursive handwriting in particular may seem a futile use of motor skills, for many, the track of a pen soaring loops across a paper allows them not only several cognitive benefits, but a sense of individuality and normalcy in a rapidly digitalizing world. Cursive handwriting, though it may seem outdated in the digital age, is vital in society not only because it promotes cognitive development, but because it can be used to define a person and his/her work; due to the importance of cursive writing, its teaching must not be omitted from schooling.

In practice, the benefits of cursive writing cannot be outshone, especially in terms of cognitive development. Studies show that the act of handwriting not only develops the regions of the brain associated with thinking, short term memory, and language, but that it also helps with information retention (Kysilko). While the cognitive benefits of handwriting are obviously not limited to cursive handwriting, manuscript, while it yields the same benefits, is slower. Many proponents of eliminating the teaching of cursive in schools argue that it would allow time for other more important skills to be developed, cursive helps save time in the long term for many due to its fluidity in practice. Others claim that cursive should not be taught as a necessity but as an art, but this perspective, too, fails to acknowledge that it contradicts the primary doctrine of the anti-cursive: that the teaching of the skills is a waste of time (Pot). The historical significance of cursive is also important to note when discussing the viability of teaching cursive in school in the modern day. In American history, cursive was taught as a method of cultivating an American identity, as Dickie Drake, Alabama state representative, stated, “cursive writing identifies you as much as your physical features do.” (Trubek). In order to maintain the sense of individuality Americans hold to dearly, handwriting must continue to be taught. Perhaps handwriting seems a superficial means of maintaining individuality, but in a rapidly digitalizing world, sometimes the only way to distinguish the writing of two people is by handwriting. Unless you are a seasoned stylographer, two 12pts Times New Romans fonts written by anonymous authors will be impossible to distinguish. No matter how you look at it, cursive handwriting is a vital component of human development and must continue to be taught in schools.

Perhaps the most common rebuttal to the importance of teaching cursive handwriting in school is that traditional writing methods are becoming obsolete, but studies show that this is clearly not the case. As schools opt to print fewer copies of worksheets in favor of digital annotation and many textbooks are releasing digital forms, a widespread falsehood is gaining popularity: the idea that schools are “[writing] off the traditional route of writing” (Gillis). In casual observation of more affluent areas, this may seem obvious, but studies show that a greater amount of time in many elementary classrooms is spent hand-writing than is spent using technology (graph). This simple disproval eliminates the top argument against the continuation of teaching cursive handwriting, thus deeming anti-cursive sentiment unarguable.

The teaching of cursive in schools offers copious amounts of benefit for students that cannot effectively be replaced by any other methods. Cursive is ingrained in the minds of people everywhere, perhaps due to its lasting effect on human cognitive development. So I implore you, student or not, to continue to study cursive. Allow yourself a return to tradition after a long day at the computer. You might just have a mark on your mind forever.

Sample #2:

In the present, handwriting instruction in schools has dwindled from its former prominence. The digital age offers alternatives to developing and mastering penmanship, so the art is less prioritized compared to alternative common core subjects. Although handwriting instruction develops motor skills, it has little place in schools because it is inefficient compared to technology, and other subjects are more important in the real world.

Many advocates for handwriting instruction cite motor skill development as a reason to keep the practice. For instance, the National Association of State Boards of Education claims practicing handwriting both requires and augments fine motor skills (Source D). However, attributing motor skills primarily to this cause is not entirely accurate. Justin Pot rebutted the claim by explaining other uses of hands such as playing video games are equally as effective (Source E). While handwriting instruction may indeed promote superior motor skills, alternative options render taking periods of class for this one section, irrelevant. Therefore, the development of fine motor skills is not exclusive to handwriting instruction, so schools should instead consider less time-obtrusive alternatives.

One flaw of handwriting instruction is its decreasing efficiency with the advent of digital typing. Author Anne Trubek of the New York Times admits even third graders spend less time typing than writing (Trubek). Because note-taking skills are maximized with the author’s speed, if one method is notoriously slower than others, the most efficient option should be practiced. In fact, a survey of elementary school students quantified the difference in speed as handwriting takes over twice as much time as computer use (Source F). Due to this extreme discrepancy, practicing handwriting instruction in schools should not be encouraged when technology is generally far superior for the students whose skills must be cultivated. As such, handwriting instruction has little place in the modern era.

Finally, other subjects should take the place of time spent instructing handwriting in schools. Specifically in regards to specialized handwriting like cursive, limited school time is better spent on subjects the students will use daily, and even second-grade teacher Deb Fitzgerald agreed schools should “‘move on’ and focus class time on other topics” (Source A). Skills such as math should be prioritized for younger children since methods like multiplication are integral to both adult and child life (Source E). Overall, rather than devote time to a subject with little use, schools should instead reallocate time to other case topics the student can use in the real world.

In conclusion, while handwriting instruction has some amount of merit with its promotion of motor skills, it poses little worth in schools because of its inefficiency and lack of physical use.

Sample #3:

Cursive handwriting should not be focused, or taught in school, because it is a waste of time, it is not useful, and technology is more prevalent now.

Teaching cursive writing is a waste of time. If cursive writing is not mandatory, then that can lead students to focus on building a larger vocabulary, which will ultimately make them a stronger writer. In Source C, the text states in the last paragraph “the changes imposed by the digital age may be good for writers and writing, because they achieve automatically quicker on the keyboard, today’s third graders may well become better writers as handwriting takes up less of their education.” This piece of text displays how younger children have a better chance at being better writers as handwriting is not taking much of their time. With this extra time the children could be building vocabulary to be a successful writer. Learning cursive writing in school is a waste of time because as the future is approaching the use of cursive is becoming non-existent. Source A states that “the experiences most of us have, with 30 minutes of practicing cursive in class, have gone by the wayside.” This is supporting the fact that the time used learning cursive has not been useful in everyday life.

Going along with a waste of time cursive isn’t used enough to be beneficial, so why learn it. Many schools have cut it out of the curriculum. Source A states that “41 states have adopted the Common Core State Standards for English, which omits cursive handwriting from required curriculum.” Source A clearly displays the ideal that cursive handwriting in the school system isn’t mandatory, because it is stated that 41 states have taken it out of their curriculum.

As time goes on and technology progresses technology will be used more and the use of pencil and paper are going to be more discrete. In addition to that with technology advancing there are going to need to be skills taught about technology. Source A states “The move outside our schools, and in innovative schools, is toward technology.” This from Source A is simply supporting that technology is taking over, because the world after school is filled with technology. From Source C it states “the world is changing, quickly. And while it is hard to make predictions about where technology is headed, it’s safe to say the future won’t involve a lot of cursive handwriting.” With that in mind, it is obvious to see with technology advancing the need for cursive handwriting is decreasing.

To conclude, cursive handwriting shouldn’t be a skill enforced in school.

Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:

Turnitin Report

Formatting

Title Page

Citation

Outline

Place an Order