joshc

Did you take it at UNT? Because I took it there yesterday and it crashed twice. I called ETS about retaking the GRE for free (because my score was not great), and they said I have to write a letter to the ETS complaint center, they don't have a phone number.

I just took the GRE today and scored poorly. A 155 verbal and 152 quant. I want to apply to graduate schools for a history PhD. Programs like UVA and College of William and Mary. I had studied ETS, Princeton, GRE for Dummies and Manhattan prep. I should probably take it again at the end of September in order to give me enough time to apply. Should I find a class or tutor or other books? Advice is appreciated.

Here are two essays that I just completed. I believe they are much better. Any advice would be much appreciated. Issue: The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government, industry, or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation, not competition. I agree with the statement that the best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government, industry, or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation, not competition. A leader has to be cooperative with the people he or she leads and other leaders to get ahead. Cooperation also helps one another while competition drags others down and leaves them behind. It is best to train young people through cooperation for a job as a leader in government because that is what leaders are supposed to do in government. A leader in government, like a president, is supposed to look out for his or her citizens. They can only do this by cooperating with the Senate and House of Representatives, state legislatures and even the local levels. A president is not successful by trying to compete with everyone else. An example of a good president is one who compromises with other elected representatives for the good of the country. One who always competes with the other party will not succeed in bringing the country together and representing what is best for the entire citizenship. Leading through cooperation is not only best for the public office but also the private one as well. What may seem unnatural is when you are running a business is not to be so competitive but cooperate as well. An idea or product developed by one company may also work out quite well in yours so why not cooperate with that company to benefit both you and the other company. Cooperation between businesses can lead to higher profit and friendly relations which both can lead to high morale in the employees. The main goal of a business is of course to make profit but you can do it through cooperating instead of competing. The best leader finds ways to cooperate with either his local government that his business is in or other businesses. Cooperation can bring all parties involved to better results. And it is the better way to go about life instead of competing. It is best to be a leader through cooperation whether you are in the public or private sphere but the best reason why leaders should be cooperative is because it is the best way to treat our fellow man. Competition pushes others away and is only driven by selfish motive. On the other hand, cooperation supports and helps others and finds ways to not only help ourselves but people around us. This is the best way to see why leaders should be trained to be cooperative. No one wants to deal with a leader who is dismissive of other people’s needs or desires. A leader needs to be open and cooperative. It is the best way to run a public office or a private business but it is also the more moral avenue compared to competition. A society needs to train more helpful leaders who cooperate not selfish ones who only desire competition. Argument: The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company. “According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than in any other year. And yet the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers about specific Super Screen movies actually increased during the past year. Clearly, the contents of these reviews are not reaching enough of our prospective viewers. Thus, the problem lies not with the quality of our movies but with the public’s lack of awareness that movies of good quality are available. Super Screen should therefore allocate a greater share of its budget next year to reaching the public through advertising.” This argument has several flaws in its reasoning. The main problem is that the advertising director assumes that more critical acclaim a movie receives the higher grossing it will become. This could not be further from the truth and putting more of their budget into advertising this assumption is unwise. Almost every year that goes by, the highest grossing movies in America are rarely reviewed very highly by critics. All three Transformers movies have grossed about a billion dollars each and yet neither one of them has a higher rating than 57% on the critical review conglomerate website, Rottentomatoes.com. The Last Airbender had a pitiful 7% and yet it grossed 40 million dollars on its opening weekend. The biggest grossing movies of the year almost always never have very high reviews or earn many awards from the Oscars or other award shows. And to hurt the argument even worse is the fact that higher reviewed movies often do not do well at the box office. The best picture winner for an Oscar in 2009, the Hurt Locker, only earned 17 million dollars while playing in theatres. The best picture winner in 2011, the Artist, only received 44 million dollars. The facts being that highly reviewed films simply do not perform well at the box office. The reason why Super Screens is losing business may be actually because they have so many critically lauded movies. The evidence shows the people prefer to see big budget spectacles that for the most part are poorly received by critics compared to highly reviewed Oscar winners. Super Screen makes a faulty assumption by thinking that the public’s lack of awareness of good movies is available at their theatre is the reason why they are losing money. They could be perfectly aware of the fact and disregard it. There could be numerous reasons why they have fewer customers. Maybe the prices went up or maybe there is a better and newer movie theatre that was built down the road. We simply do not know the reason why Super Screens has lost business. And to believe it is because of the lack of awareness in highly reviewed films when historical facts point to the contrary is just not correct.

Are these essays any good? All advice and criticism is welcome. Please tell me how I can improve. Thank you. Issue:A nation should require all of its students to study the same material until they enter college. A nation should not require all of its students to study the same material until they enter college. There should be diversity in what students learn. This does not mean that this justifies inadequate education but that it should be up the local level on what students learn. Having education implemented by the national level has proven ineffective with no legitimate improvement in education compared to other first world countries. Therefore, a nation should not have a base curriculum for the entire country. One example why national curriculum does not work is with No Child Left Behind passed in 2002 by congress and signed by President Bush. This was supposed to help improve student's test scores by creating a national curriculum that would standardize everything thus making it easier for students to get ahead. This has not worked. Nations are big places and the United States is no exception. What may work in one area of the country may not in another. No Child Left Behind is a good example of a national curriculum not working. As stated before, what may work in one part of the country may not in another. We are a large and very diverse country with students requiring different needs. One blanket over everyone will not and has not helped students. Maybe one school needs more help in math and needs to spend more time on that while another may need more time on history; the national level should let the local level decide what needs to be studied because they know what is best. The local level spends the most times with the children they are teaching. Independent school districts should have the most control on what they teach to the children. One city could be teaching different material compared to another but that does not mean an ineffective or inadequate education. We should want our country to continue to be diverse and that can only be accomplished with a diverse education provided by the local level. We can see from the past that a national curriculum does not work. Letting independent school districts have the most leeway in education is the best way in education our children. Our country is diverse and a diverse education is the best way to provide a good education. Argument: Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news. During this time period, most of the complaints received from viewers were concerned with our station's coverage of weather and local news. In addition, local businesses that used to advertise during our late-night news program have just canceled their advertising contracts with us. Therefore, in order to attract more viewers to the program and to avoid losing any further advertising revenues, we should restore the time devoted to weather and local news to its former level. The argument provided has numerous issues. These problems need to be corrected in order to provide a strong and evidence based argument. Several problems are the complaints, ads from local businesses and viewership. First and foremost just because there are complaints about one issue does not mean that even more people are happy with what is seen as a problem. The argument states that there are complaints about not enough coverage on weather and local news, however there is nothing that states in the argument that most people would prefer less weather and local news. We do not know why the late-night news program started to broadcast more national news. It could be because that's what the people wanted. Maybe there was a survey about it and more people voted for national news in stead of local news and the weather. The complaints about the coverage of weather and local news could be a small minority. There needs to be evidence to back up this claim. A second problem with the argument is the one of the local business ads. The business manager says that local businesses have canceled their advertising contracts. But why are they doing this? There is no reason given in the argument. It may have nothing to do with the fact of the local channel broadcasting national news. Maybe the cost of advertising is going up and the local businesses can not afford it. We just do not know the reason on why they are canceling the advertising contracts thus it is unwise to go by this assumption without proof. A third problem with the argument is that people would watch the news more thus bringing in more revenue if they put back more weather and local news. This needs facts to back it up. Is there a survey that says that's what the people want? And is there proof that more advertising would join in if there was more weather and local news? There is no evidence to back this up. The argument needs empirical evidence to show that they would gain more viewers and advertisers thus brining in more revenue if they showed local news and weather. There are serious problems with this argument with the problem of complaints, ads and viewership that need to be addressed. Without facts backing up this argument it has a hard time standing on firm ground.