Divyanshi Chugh

Hi, Can you please grade the essay below on the basis of the scoring guidelines (given at the end)? The best ideas arise from a passionate interest in commonplace things. Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement above and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how those considerations shape your position. The best ideas arise from a passionate interest in commonplace things, if seen keenly and deeply. Though, many a times incredible ideas come from specialized study of unique things. But these too can be said to be ultimately coming from an interest in commonplace things! A curious eye and a depth within oneself are two important ingredients of this passionate interest. An interest in commonplace things, even if they are approached passionately, can lead to interesting discoveries and inventions, but will remain only a surface appraisal of things if they are viewed without curiosity and depth. By curiosity, I mean the curiosity about the fundamental ingredients. And, by depth, I mean an uncovering for the deeper, profounder meaning of things. For instance, a passionate interest in cooking can produce delicious dishes, but it requires a level of depth in oneself to observe how the practice of cooking can be a meditation practice. Similarly, it requires a keen eye to question what happens to the vegetable waste after the cooking is complete. It is this sense of curiosity that can lead the mind to delve into question of how the waste produced from cooking can be re-used. This sense of curiosity combined with a concern for one’s environment can lead to the actual practice of vermicomposting. The idea of vermicomposting itself only requires curiosity about commonplace things. This is not to say that ‘curiosity and depth’ cannot form a part of the passionate interest. Passionate interest can be encompassing of these two important aspects of finding big ideas in commonplace things. The best example perhaps is that of the observation of an apple falling that led to the idea of gravity. Herein passionate interest about a simple event of an apple falling from the tree, fueled with a sense of curiosity that gave Einstein a keen eye as well as a level of depth in oneself that helped him connect a simple event to something larger, led to the big idea of gravity. Another example of how passionate interest in commonplace things acts leads to big ideas is the idea of creating a new system of an economy by Professor Otto Scharmer. He simply observed that the present system of the economy is based on the assumption that humans are self-interested individuals, which in reality may or may not hold true. Thus, on the basis of an alternate view of human nature, which he borrowed from Eastern philosophies, he is attempting to create a new system altogether! This is one of the best examples of how simply observing that humans are not always self-interested in his personal life, led to the big idea of creating a new economic system. On the basis of a scrutiny of the best ideas in the history of human civilization--be it the discovery of fire through an accident or the construction of the school of yoga from observation of the movements of life--one can say that a passionate interest in commonplace things has been the source of origination of best ideas. However, some of the best ideas come from a specialized understanding of lesser-known things. This includes a spectrum of technology inventions, ranging from the invention of robots to highly specialized satellites, though even they can be said to have ultimately come from a keen and deep observation of commonplace things! Score 6 Outstanding In addressing the specific task directions, a 6 response presents a cogent, well-articulated analysis of the issue and conveys meaning skillfully. A typical response in this category: articulates a clear and insightful position on the issue in accordance with the assigned task develops the position fully with compelling reasons and/or persuasive examples sustains a well-focused, well-organized analysis, connecting ideas logically conveys ideas fluently and precisely, using effective vocabulary and sentence variety demonstrates superior facility with the conventions of standard written English (i.e., grammar, usage and mechanics), but may have minor errors Score 5 Strong In addressing the specific task directions, a 5 response presents a generally thoughtful, well-developed analysis of the issue and conveys meaning clearly. A typical response in this category: presents a clear and well-considered position on the issue in accordance with the assigned task develops the position with logically sound reasons and/or well-chosen examples is focused and generally well organized, connecting ideas appropriately conveys ideas clearly and well, using appropriate vocabulary and sentence variety demonstrates facility with the conventions of standard written English, but may have minor errors Score 4 Adequate In addressing the specific task directions, a 4 response presents a competent analysis of the issue and conveys meaning with acceptable clarity. A typical response in this category: presents a clear position on the issue in accordance with the assigned task develops the position with relevant reasons and/or examples is adequately focused and organized demonstrates sufficient control of language to express ideas with acceptable clarity generally demonstrates control of the conventions of standard written English, but may have some errors Score 3 Limited A 3 response demonstrates some competence in addressing the specific task directions, in analyzing the issue and in conveying meaning, but is obviously flawed. A typical response in this category exhibits ONE OR MORE of the following characteristics: is vague or limited in addressing the specific task directions and in presenting or developing a position on the issue or both is weak in the use of relevant reasons or examples or relies largely on unsupported claims is limited in focus and/or organization has problems in language and sentence structure that result in a lack of clarity contains occasional major errors or frequent minor errors in grammar, usage or mechanics that can interfere with meaning Score 2 Seriously Flawed A 2 response largely disregards the specific task directions and/or demonstrates serious weaknesses in analytical writing. A typical response in this category exhibits ONE OR MORE of the following characteristics: is unclear or seriously limited in addressing the specific task directions and in presenting or developing a position on the issue or both provides few, if any, relevant reasons or examples in support of its claims is poorly focused and/or poorly organized has serious problems in language and sentence structure that frequently interfere with meaning contains serious errors in grammar, usage or mechanics that frequently obscure meaning Score 1 Fundamentally Deficient A 1 response demonstrates fundamental deficiencies in analytical writing. A typical response in this category exhibits ONE OR MORE of the following characteristics: provides little or no evidence of understanding the issue provides little or no evidence of the ability to develop an organized response (e.g., is disorganized and/or extremely brief) has severe problems in language and sentence structure that persistently interfere with meaning contains pervasive errors in grammar, usage or mechanics that result in incoherence Score 0 Off topic (i.e., provides no evidence of an attempt to address the assigned topic), is in a foreign language, merely copies the topic, consists of only keystroke characters or is illegible or nonverbal. Score NS The essay response is blank.