Untitled Document

7. It is generally agreed that society benefits from the work of its members. Compare the contributions of artists to society with the contributions of scientists to society. Which type of contribution do you think is valued more by society? Give specific reasons to support your answer.

To score a "6," the essay will be a well organized one that accomplishes the three requirements of the assignment. First, the writer must compare (i.e., show similarities) the contributions of artists to society with the contributions of scientists to society. Second, not waffling on the issue, the writer should take a position by choosing either the artist or the scientist as the one who makes the most important contributions to society. The argument should be logical and plausible and cause the reader to reconsider his point of view if he is in disagreement or cause the reader to further bolster his position if he is in agreement. Third, the writer should give two or more reasons to support his argument. The essay will have a high degree of grammatical correctness and syntactic variety but may have slight flaws in writing, consistent with timed, first draft prose.

In sociology, the theoretical perspective of using factors that contribute for the benefit of society as a whole is said to be the ""functionalist"" perspective. The French sociologist Emil Durkheim, through his studies of groups and communities, is one of the founders of this functionalist theory. We look at our own community/society and see many areas which members have contributed in order to make the society a better one -- a more functional one. We can observe contributions of many members to politics, education, and culture. More specifically, we can observe and compare the contributions of artists and scientists. Based on the criteria of who is seen to be more necessary, we can say which group society (at large) values more.

First, the artists (i.e. painters, writers, architects, designers) have contributed much to our living environment and culture. Their contributions are reflections of the inner self of a culture and these reflections are an expression of a cultural collective being. For example, when we look at the paintings from St Peter's Cathedral, they reflect the strong religious values and beliefs of that historical period, which was the contribution of artists during that time. This contribution could be considered a legacy, as well as architectural contributions, such as the Pyramids in Meso-America. These contributions allow us to study the societal values and beliefs of a particular period in history. We become more knowledgeable about the world and the ways of the world during different eras. I think one contribution of artists is that they continually cause society to change and reshape itself.

Second, scientists have benefitted society. The discoveries of scientists have contributed to agriculture, medicine, and technology. Through the influence of science, farmers started mixing seeds in order to obtain a better crop yield. Through scientific research, medicines have been discovered which help in the fight against disease. Science has helped advance telecommunications in so many ways, with the satellite being just one example. Technology has made information accessible. Therefore, comparing the present with the past, the knowledge we all have now has increased extremely. Who do we need to thank for all these contributions, scientists. Even now (into the future) their work goes on, we read and hear about the effort to find a cure for cancer and aids. I believe that through science, these cures will be discovered in the future.

I think that our society is very lucky to have contributions from artists as well as scientists. Everyone (in his or her own way) contributes to society, but I think scientists are more valued because they contribute to what society defines as quality of life. Due to that definition, the public consensus is that scientists are more necessary. I believe we need artists and scientists, but society values scientists more.

8. Comments on how this essay meets ETS criteria for a "6:"

This essay demonstrates clear competence in writing on both the rhetorical and syntactic levels

•Through the example of French sociologist Durheim, the writer introduces the focus of the essay: to show how people's contribution make society a more functional one. And through an explicit thesis (i.e., More specifically, we can observe and compare the contributions of artists and scientists. Based on the criteria of who is seen to be more necessary, we can say which group society (at large) values more), the writer is able to frame the introduction around the TWE prompt. In the developmental parts of the essay, the writer restates the key points in the thesis (i.e., contributions of artists and scientists) in a logical fashion. There are specific reasons and examples to support those points.

The essay has a logical plan divided into three parts: 1. What contributions artists make. 2. How scientists contribute to society. 3. Why society values scientists more. Hence, the essay is tightly organized around the TWE prompt. Conceding in the conclusion that we need artists and scientists, the writer shows both are valued but that society needs scientists more since they are fundamental in defining our quality of life. The only drawback to the conclusion is the writer was not able to argue that position in depth due to the thirty minute time constraint.

•Paragraphs one, two and three use appropriate details to support the thesis. For instance, in paragraph two, the writer talks about paintings from St Peter's Cathedral and Pyramids in Meso-America as supporting examples to show how their constructions allow us to study the societal values and beliefs of a particular period in history.

Displaying consistent facility in the use of punctuation and syntactic variety, the essay uses simple, compound, and complex sentence structures. Moreover, there are no significant sentence structure or mechanical errors in the essay; thus the essay has a high level of polish.
The writer also has a good command of vocabulary (i.e., functionalist, criteria, legacy, and eras) and transitional words (i.e., first, for example, and second) to demonstrate appropriate word choice.