absande

This is an argument task topic off of the ETS page. I used a random number generator to pick the topic, and timed it out to 30 minutes. I am using Magoosh as my study prep, so I am using the guidelines used from them! This is my first attempt at an argument task, so any help would be appreciated! Thanks in advance! Topic: The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine. "Two studies of amphibians in Xanadu National Park confirm a significant decline in the numbers of amphibians. In 1975 there were seven species of amphibians in the park, and there were abundant numbers of each species. However, in 2002 only four species of amphibians were observed in the park, and the numbers of each species were drastically reduced. One proposed explanation is that the decline was caused by the introduction of trout into the park's waters, which began in 1975. (Trout are known to eat amphibian eggs.)" Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument. Essay: The argument that the introduction of trout into the park’s waters is to blame for the decrease of the number of amphibious species is flawed for numerous reasons. There are several different reasons and possibilities that a decrease in the numbers of species can occur. The fact that the trout were introduced in 1975, and almost 30 years later there’s a decrease in numbers, could be a mere coincidence. All species must compete for survival, even in parks. The seven original amphibious species in the park may have competed other species to extinction. The animals must compete for food, mating, shelter, water, and several other things. Therefor, seven species in close quarters in a park could have been too much demand on the environment, leading some species to fall off the grid. The time between 1975 and 2002 is almost 30 years, which can be well more than a lifetime in many species. Similar to how normal environments change, the park where these animals live also changes. A drop in numbers could have resulted in an environmental change such as more or less rain in certain years, or maybe the park’s management changed over the years, resulting in a change in the upkeep of the park facilities. The amount of how this park could have changed in a matter of 27 years is endless. The letter states that the trout were introduced in 1975 and 27 years later they noticed the decrease in the amphibians. Meaning, the amphibians could have dropped in numbers at any point between those times. It could simply be a happenchance that the trout were introduced into the park at that time. The amphibians could have started to slowly decrease before then, or they could have had a more drastic change maybe only a few years before the numbers were recorded in 2002. Since the statistics weren’t recorded on a normal basis, there is no way to show when this phenomenon occurred within the park, therefor not being able to blame the trout introduction. There is no obvious proof to show that the trout are the reason for the reduction of amphibians found in the park. There are several ways this could have occurred over the course of 27 years and a simple cause and effect does not account for the numerous other factors that should be considered in this conclusion.

I'm using Magoosh as my GRE Study Prep, and following the guidelines they used! I got the topic off the ETS website and used a random generator to pick the topic. I timed myself exactly 30 minutes. This is my first attempt, so it's probably pretty rough :) and this is an Issue Task Essay! Topic: Educators should base their assessment of students' learning not on students' grasp of facts but on the ability to explain the ideas, trends, and concepts that those facts illustrate. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position. Essay: Almost everyone at some point in their lifetime will take a test to assess their knowledge supposedly learned on a certain subject matter. Educators should base this assessment of a student’s knowledge, not simply by testing their factual remembrance and memory, but also by questioning how they can apply that information into real world situations. Schools and other educational programs have become to be known as teaching through memorization. They are assessing their students’ using test after test, and enforcing them to study via flashcards and other memory-strengthening tools. This continues throughout the length of the class, ending the program with similar assessments that they began with. This shows that the educators are focusing more on cramming the students with factual information, rather than them building upon the knowledge they have already been taught and assessing them in a new manner. While it is imperative for students to have and hold on to this knowledge of factual material, they must be able to understand the big picture in order to apply it to real world situations. Simply knowing or recognizing terminology will not suffice once they must use this knowledge they have learned into their field later in life. An aspiring scientist might know a single chemical reaction, but if they cannot apply this to a bigger, broader experiment, then the information can be deemed useless. With this being said, grasping facts is the foundation of their ability to explain bigger ideas and concepts of that subject. To an extent, assessing students’ understanding of the basic facts of a subject is imperative before expecting them to be able to comprehend and explain the more elusive concepts that make up everyday life. Therefor, teachers should assess students on their comprehension of factual information before moving on to more difficult material in the hierarchy of the subject. Though, this is not saying that these kinds of assessments should be the sole basis of the students’ understanding of an entire subject. Educators assessing the true knowledge learned by their students is much more complex than a simple factual multiple-choice test. Teachers need to go more in depth in their assessments in order to prove that their students’ can understand and explain difficult concepts and ideas regarding the subject they have apparently been teaching.