The following Graduation Writing Proficiency Examination essays had been written by HSU students during a frequently planned GWPE. Excluding the removal of cross-outs, the essays are reproduced right here just as written. Insofar as possible, the essays had been chosen to represent the entire selection of feasible ratings. The majors represented by the writers of these essays are, in alphabetical purchase, Art, Biology, Business management, Environmental Resources Engineering, Fisheries, Geography, Geology, Industrial Arts, and site preparing and Interpretation.

Analytical Essay Prompt

You have 45 minutes to create regarding the after subject.

Please read and look at the following two quotations:

  1. «Organized charity is performing great for good-for-nothing people.»
  2. «Charity is an assisting hand extended to truly save some from the inferno of these present life.»

Write an essay regarding the above two statements in three parts the following:

  1. Compare the statements. Explain what the 2 statements have as a common factor and how they overlap.
  2. Contrast the statements. Explain how the two statements differ.
  3. Take a posture pertaining to both statements by selecting one or mediating between them, and help your view with an illustration from your own observation or experience.

Sample Essay Score: 6

The two statements address the identical subject. Which, they address charity, that will be defined as--the act of offering something of value, without the expectation of one thing in return. Further, the 2 statements address the receiver, the person or individuals to who the charity is directed.

Your two statements both offer equal weight towards the meaning of charity is evidenced by the information «doing good,» and «hand extended to truly save.» These information both illustrate the benificence of this act of charity, it is in one single act, both a recognition of need, and an effort to fulfill that need. They both paint an image of goodness, honor and sharing on the part of the charity giver.

Despite these similarities, the 2 statements have been in stark opposition towards the beneficiary's status in society. 1st, calling the receivers «good for nothing individuals,» depicts vagrants, bums, and worthless flies, fouling the smooth-flowing area of culture. The second, seeing the receivers as involved with an «inferno,» brings in your thoughts visions of lost souls, wandering homeless and possesionless into the Dante-esque hell of a society which measures an individual's worth by his wealth.

Another comparison involving the two statements, more subdued yet intuitively strong, is that the benefactor, the charity-giver, attains a straight higher amount of honor when he gives to 1 in true need, than when their sharing is enforced, by fees, social stress or inherited reaction. The very first statement talks towards latter of those, the next to the former. Thus, the second statement not merely features a higher character to the beneficiary, but in addition toward benefactor whoever actions are performed from the heart.

Although the truth, as always, is based on the middle ground, between these two extremes, i'm more inclined to your 2nd declaration. I've experienced some extent of sympathy to almost every destitute, penniless or homeless individual that I've met. Hobos, bums on trains additionally the road, are there often as a result of a fallen thread into the Fates' tapestry or a falling out with society. Some will never accept a handout if offered, demanding to execute work in exchange, while some are every means worthy of a handout, refusing formal government welfare.

Poor people associated with the urban slums are, almost all enough time, victims of a culture which has entrenched them in a life style where its virtually to carry themselves out. They are the people which are most aptly referred to as falling to an «inferno» in their present life. That culture is obligated to providing charity to these victims of its very own hand is simply.

I have seen examples or individuals getting charity who simply into the work of accepting it, belie a specific «good-for- nothingness.» They're frequently people who does be affluent apart from for a desire to get a totally free ride on communities' right back. A part-time used student, relaxing the summer on taxpayers' expense is certainly one instance which sticks out in my personal experience.

Nevertheless those in sounding great for absolutely nothing are one minute percentage of those receiving charity. With an optomistic view associated with the situation of mankind, one cannot deny the value of charity not only to those getting it, but toward globe generally speaking.

Comment: bearing in mind that essay ended up being written in 45 moments, this might be an exceptional reaction. Although it has some flaws, it really is well developed and organized. There are indications («the Dante-esqe hell of society») of considerable elegance in language and sentence structure.

Test Essay rating: 5

Charity happens to be practiced for a huge number of years by human beings. The tale of the good Samaritan, found in the bible, is an ancient exemplory instance of charity which familiar to numerous individuals. The next two quotes are both discussed charity: «Organized charity is doing best for good-for- nothing individuals,» and, «Charity is a helping hand extending out to truly save some from inferno of these current life.» Both these two quotes mean that charity involves helping, with acts of kindness, those who are in need of assistance or people who are destitute.

However, the two quotes express commonly divergent views regarding value of using charity to simply help destitute people. The very first estimate shows that charity is worthless. It signifies that the folks that charity is directed toward are not worthy of such help and that charity will not assist them boost their life. In comparison, the second estimate implies that the recipients of charity are worth the support afforded. It means that the life of the individuals recieving the charity is supposed to be better due to it.

We agree with the second quote. The first estimate shows too little belief into the good side of human instinct and a disregard to wanting to assist other people. The second quote supports a belief that humans deserve a good life style. In my opinion that charity just isn't a «cure-all», someone must wish to work toward helping himself or by herself. But often individuals needing charity don't possess the product means or good attitudes required to assist themselves better their everyday lives. Charity can provide both.

One summer time my mother and three sisters, and I also must carry on welfare. We did not have enough money for the fundamental necessities of life even though my mom ended up being working. The food stamps which help from our church we were awarded were significantly appreciated by united states. Unfortunately, there's an attitude held by many inside our culture that recieving charity is degrading and thus i did not tell many of my friends about our financial predicament. The charity provided to us that summer enabled united states to eat. It offered united states using the way to survive before the autumn when my mother worked extra hours training. I really believe charity is helpful and a necessary act of concern for people in need. There are several people who abuse the charity written by others but you can find always abusers in culture. It isn't justified to reject people in need of assistance due to the unethical actions of some.

Comment: This paper handles the question quite nicely. It is clearly arranged and, though it cannot explore the probabilities of the comparison/contrast, it's strong in its use of supporting example. Its syntax, syntax and diction are free from major dilemmas.

Test Essay rating: 4

It is argued that «organized charity provides beneficial to the good-for-nothing» and that charity is a true benefit to those in need of assistance. These statements, although quite contrary also have some aspects in accordance. The distinction is largely in the perspective of individual directly affected.

To express that charity is doing beneficial to the good-for-nothing suggests that whoever whom accept charity are worthless and unproductive. Plus its most likely your receivers of charity have been unproductive, ie out of work. Because they represent a potential for manufacturing indicates they're not worthless however. By accepting charity you can but feel worthless. This might be as a result of the pervasive attitude that individuals must be effective to be good- for-something.

Because folks are usually thrust out from the employees without any forewarning and since it is typical that brand new work is difficult to get, the acceptance of charity doesn't constantly cause distress. Workers know that their aid is only temporary until they truly are matched with a fresh work.

In any case, when individuals are within the position where charity will be offered and it is needed, chances are that they will feel both unproductive and grateful. Since they are in trouble economically their lives can indeed be an inferno.

The essential difference between the appreciation for required charity and sense of «freeloading» is great whenever feeling functions singularly. Being grateful for help frequently causes individuals to organize and provide a lot more of by themselves to others. Those people who have been assisted frequently feel motivated to simply help other people.

Alternatively, those that feel unproductive and worthless are ashamed and bitter. They truly are too ridden with shame and self-consciousness to encourage which help others. They truly are likely to feel anger toward the society that provides them charity rather than gratitude.

The sensation that is most likely pervasive on the list of disfortunate lies someplace in between guilt & gratitude. The appreciation part of the scale is likely to be more effective generally speaking and therefore may be the prefered state. By gratefully accepting help, some immediate problems are fixed the unfortunate and they are able to make an effort to reorganize their everyday lives.

The small little bit of guilt from the other side regarding the scale helps individuals with help recognize the needs of disfortunate individuals. Then, they could both interact to rebuild their lives and get back on the legs. For example, an account based in the S. F. Chronicle recently described a couple have been unemployed whom became buddies and started a firewood company. They certainly were both formerly on general public support and today are down. They both indicated that had the help maybe not been available they would not need made it.

Because of the inspiration induced by the acceptance of aid the helping hand view is accepted.

Comment: Although competent, this paper is less effective versus past two. The many quick paragraphs indicates some difficulties with growth of some ideas. The overuse of passive sound («It is argued,» etc.), some diction issues («the feeling functions singularly,» «disfortunate»), combined with the sketchiness of the instance, often affect the author's meaning.

Test Essay rating: 3

The two quotes state that charity does best for an integral part of culture. For some people both statements might indicate that «good-for-nothing people» and individuals in «the inferno of the current life» are one in identical. With other people, the parts of the two quotes coping with those who recive charity might mean that the kind of individuals mentioned in quote «A» won't be the same as those mentioned in quote «B.»

For people life is an income hell, and they are therefore in need of charity. You can find people in society however, that believe that these individuals create their hell. While they might keep that charity is wonderful for they, they nevertheless consider them as «good-for-nothing». They probably think that charity cases could rise out of their «inferno» if they tried, nonetheless they will not and are also for that reason a burdun on culture.

To lots of people in society there was a distinction involving the «good for absolutely nothing people» reciving charity and the ones for who life is hell also reciving charity. In addition, they believe organized charity might have a tendency to do best for people who don't actually desrve it (the «good for absolutely nothing people»). While, charity generally has a tendency to help you the great for nothings as well as the people who actually need it.

Statement «B,» is the better because takes a more positive view to individuals in need of assistance. Statement «A» takes a less good, less cynical view.

I know of someone who receives charity that someone who might create declaration «A» would won't provide charity to. This person is always to proud to inform anybody of their affliction.

Test Essay get: 2

These two statements contain very strong personal biases toward the economically disadvantaged, therefore the people taking part in their welfare. Both quotations appear to include an element of sarcasm or negativity. The inescapable plight of financially regrettable individual appears to be the attitude represented in these quotations. Charity is considered an ineffective way to this issue.

Quotation A is making a judgment towards people that charity effects. The "...good-for- nothing individuals, implies that these people do not deserve the assistance of the organization. On the other hand quotation «B» is speaking a lot more of the hopelessness of charity, and its own minute influence on the public of disadvantaged.

I feel that even tho companies worried in charitable efforts have actually just an extremely small impact on the entire world in particular, it's a newbie in raising the concerns of others.

Comment: This paper is very slim in content and insufficient in interpreting the quotations. Component 3 is totally unsupported and you can find serious problems with sentence structure and diction («Charity is regarded as an ineffective methods to this problem»).

Sample Essay rating: 1

The only thing statements A and B have as a common factor is charity being supportive.

Declaration a makes use of «organized» where statement B utilizes charity generally speaking. What this means is declaration B include all declaration A but A can simply be an integral part of statement B.

Charity is supportive to many people. It really is helpful but charity can be mistreated. Individuals residing for what other folks will hand out for them will not be living their very own life.

Comment: This paper is much too undeveloped for even a minor answer.

For extra information in regards to the GWPE, be sure to contact:

How to cite this essay: