GRE Essays - Help

[jujubee202]

HI Gradcafe,

Just finished writing out one Issue and one Argument essay from the list of possible GRE prompts. Feel free to read and offer and critique if you have any. Thanks!

 

Issue Topic:

The best way to teach is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones.

 

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.

I agree that with the recommendation in that the best way to teach includes praising positive actions, but I don’t agree that the best way to teach includes ignoring negative actions. Teaching entails a fragile balance of praising positive actions while making sure that any negative actions are corrected, without punishment or criticizing so often that the learner loses confidence in their ability to fulfill the goal.

Praising positive actions is important because it serves two important purposes for the learner. First, it encourages the positive action and lets the learner know what s/he did correctly so that they continue to do the positive action when it’s appropriate. It helps the learner reinforce and repeat the things they’ve correctly learned. Secondly, it builds up the confidence of the learner. Confidence is important while learning because when a learner believes they have the ability to reach their goal, they are much more motivated to learn. Without the confidence that they have the ability to achieve the goal, learners wouldn’t even try. For example, if a beginner is trying to learn a language and is so overwhelmed and discouraged that they don’t believe they can ever master the language, they are more likely to give up hope and not be motivated to learn it. Praising positive actions reinforces confidence in the learner to motivate them and help them see that they have the ability to reach their goals.

Some people believe that it’s easier and more effective to teach using the opposite of praising positive actions, which is punishing negative actions. However, punishing negative actions is not effective while teaching. It may seem easier for teachers to notice negative actions because it sticks out to them as something that “should not” be done. When learners are doing what they’re supposed to, it’s easier to take it for granted as something that they should be doing anyway. For example, if a student stays quiet like they’re supposed to doing storytime, it’s easier to take that positive action for granted, even if the student has been struggling to stay quiet the entire time. Once the student feels free and speaks up, which a teacher can construe as a negative action, it’s much easier to notice the noise that shouldn’t be there and to punish a student for it. Therefore, it may seem easier for teachers to point out and punish negative actions, rather than to notice and praise positive ones. Punishing negative actions without praising positive actions is an ineffective way to teach because it shatters the learner’s confidence as well as their motivation to learn and behave in the way that the teacher wants them to. Every time a child is punished for a negative action, for example pronouncing a word wrong while trying to learn a language, they lose confidence in their ability to master that task. Therefore, every punishment they receive is demotivating and therefore leads them to stray away from their goal of learning the thing they want to learn. As such, punishment is not an effective way to teach. The idea that punishment is ineffective may have lead to the recommendation that negative actions should be ignored.

Although learners should not be outright punished for negative actions, their negative actions should not be ignored. Negative actions should be addressed so that they may be corrected in the future. For example, if a new tax accountant is learning how to properly fill out a client’s tax return, it would be ineffective to only praise them for the boxes they filled out correctly, and completely ignore the ones they filled out incorrectly. This style of teaching will lead learners to believe they did everything correctly and will cause them to continue making huge mistakes in the future. While negative actions shouldn’t be punished, they should be addressed in a kind and compassionate manner to allow learners to learn from their mistakes, while not demolishing their confidence that they have the ability to master the task. This requires neither punishment nor ignoring the negative action. On the one hand, punishing and yelling at the new tax accountant will cause them to afraid to ask you for help in the future, will ruin their confidence and motivation, and might cause so much shock to them that they don’t learn anything from their mistakes. On the other hand, completely ignoring the negative actions will cause them to be incogniscent of their mistakes and they will continue making the same mistakes over and over again. The learning opportunity that can be taken advantage of in their mistakes will missed. It takes a balance of kindly addressing the negative action without punishment, to allow the learner to learn from their mistakes while not feeling demotivated or stupid therefore inconfident for making the mistake.

In conclusion, the recommendation that the best way to teach is the praise positive actions and ignore negative ones is accurate that praising positive actions is very beneficial for a learner, however it ignores the benefits that can be reaped from addressing negative actions. The best way to teach is a balance of praising positive actions while addressing negative ones, but without punishment. As such, both positive and negative actions should be addressed in a kind and compassionate way for the maximum learning results.

 

 

 

 

 

 Argument Topic:

The following appeared in an article written by Dr. Karp, an anthropologist.

Prompt:

The following appeared in an article written by Dr. Karp, an anthropologist.

"Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia and concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological parents. However, my recent interviews with children living in the group of islands that includes Tertia show that these children spend much more time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village. This research of mine proves that Dr. Field's conclusion about Tertian village culture is invalid and thus that the observation-centered approach to studying cultures is invalid as well. The interview-centered method that my team of graduate students is currently using in Tertia will establish a much more accurate understanding of child-rearing traditions there and in other island cultures."

Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.

 

 

            The article requires more evidence to evaluate the argument in a more accurate manner.

            The article states that Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist concluded that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological parents. Evidence of Dr. Field’s study would be helpful to prove that Dr. Field did indeed conduct this study. A published report or video of Dr. Field’s study and observations would help determine if Dr. Field’s study was conducted accurately, in the stated place and time with the stated observations. Evidence that helps prove that Dr. Field did indeed observe or report observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village would be helpful for Dr. Karp’s argument that Dr. Field’s conclusion about childrearing in Tertia is as Dr. Karp reports.

            Dr. Karp also writes that his recent interviews with children living in a group of islands that includes Tertia show that these children spend much more time talking about their biological parents than other adults. Evidence that Tertia is indeed a part of the group of islands that he studies would be helpful for Dr. Karp’s argument. This could be in the form of a map or an official classification guide of the group of islands that Dr. Karp is studying. Evidence that reports of children in Tertia (not just in the group of islands that Tertia belongs to) show that children talk more about their own parents would be helpful. This could be in the form of a study that shows a causal effect between being raised by your own parents instead of an entire town and talking about your parents more often. Documented interviews or videos of these interviews with Tertian children would be helpful to show that the children really said what Dr. Karp reports. Dr. Karp would also benefit from evidence that these children are not lying to him about what they did or how they feel about their own parents, that they are not overstating their relationship with their parents. This could be in a form of a proven lie detector test, or perhaps interviews with the children’s parents or other people in the town to confirm that the children are telling the truth and are not overstating their relationship with their parents. This evidence would help Dr. Karp’s argument that his research about the childrearing in Tertia is more valid than Dr. Field’s. Dr. Karp would also benefit from evidence that Tertia is currently the same as it was 20 years ago, when Dr. Field conducted his research. Perhaps he could look into other research or studies done 20 years ago of the culture in Tertia to note if any changes occurred. This would help prove that the disparity between Dr. Field’s conclusion 20 years ago and Dr. Karp’s current conclusion is not just a result of Tertian culture shifting within the span of 20 years. This evidence would help Dr. Karp’s argument that Dr. Field’s research was indeed invalid.

            Dr. Karp continues to write that his research proves that Dr. Field’s conclusion is invalid, and that because of this, it proves that the entire observation-centered approach is invalid as well. For this argument to be valid, Dr. Karp would benefit from evidence that Dr. Field’s research is representative of all observation-centered research. Dr. Karp would benefit from evidence that shows exactly how Dr. Field’s research is indicative of all observation-centered research, and how observation-centered research fails in other study contexts.

            Dr. Karp concludes that his interview-centered method is currently using will establish a much more accurate understanding of child-rearing traditions there and in other island cultures. Dr. Karp would benefit from evidence that his interview-centered method will be just as effective in other island cultures. He would benefit from evidence that shows that other island cultures will be just as likely to speak, will be just as forthcoming and just as honest as he believes the people in Tertia are. He would benefit from evidence that shows people in other island cultures will be able to understand and communicate with him easily.

            In conclusion, Dr. Karp’s argument could be much more strengthened by specific evidence that helps prove his argument.