Graded MCAT Writing Sample 2

[mcat_premed3832]

Scientific Inquiry is rooted in the desire to discover, but there is no discovery so important that in its pursuit a threat to human life can be tolerated.

The advancement of society is rooted in scientific discovery. Science is the impetus of a higher standard of living. Scientific inquiry has brought about cure for a multitude of diseases and a more comfortable lifestyle for many people. The discovery of a cure for a disease undergoes rigorous testing before it is distributed for human use. Cancer treatments are first tested on animals before being introduced in a human clinical setting. These drugs save many lives. The potential risk a novel drug poses is inconsequential in most cases where many people stand to benefit and the risk is minimal. With scientific progress comes improvements in the human way of life.

However, this is not always the case. Scientific progress may pose a threat to human life, and at this point scientific progress must halt. Science mutated from a source of improvement into a hideous destructive force in the form of the atomic bomb. When a scientific creation was used to kill hundreds of people, the need to limit science as a threat to human life was made apparent. In this instance, science was rooted not in the desire to discover, but in the desire to harm people. Other intolerable acts of science have been more subtle, devoid of the intent behind atrocities like the atomic bomb, but still a threat to human life. Scientific discovery has lead to the advent of cars to keep up with a fast paced society, but before cars people did not ever die in car accidents. Scientists often feel they have ascertained that a particular medicine is safe, as in the case of Hormone Replacement Therapy, but end up being mistaken at the cost of human lives. Hormone replacement therapy was prescribed to decrease cardiovascular risks, but actually increased the risk of cancer in the women taking this recommended drug. In these instances, scientific progress is not worth the risk.

Thus, scientific progressions pose certain threats to human life, and at a point where the costs outweigh the benefits it can not be tolerated. In some instances, we are unsure of the effect that the science in question will have on human life. One such debate centers around the issue of global warming. Many feel that science and technological advancement is perpetuating a cycle of harmful effects on our planet, which will cause harmful side-effects for people. Scientific advancements in this instance has placed society in a predicament between continuing advancement at the risk of possibly endangering human life. However, this is a problem which we are addressing with scientific inquiry into alternative fuels. Science is posing a threat in the form of global warming, and also presents the possible cure.

_____________________________________________


Essay #2

Ideas: pretty good.

Technical Errors: very few, overall very well written.


Primary Objective - The Writing Tasks:

Task #1: overall: not accomplished

- Problems: (1) where do you explicitly state the meaning of this phrase: “there is no discovery so important that in its pursuit a threat to human life can be tolerated”? That removes one mark out of 6 immediately. There should be a clear assertion: The statement provided suggests that even if one were to pursue research to improve 1000 lives, should the life of one human be at risk to be terminated by such exploration, then that risk is unacceptable. (2) Again, your style of writing seems to suggest that you agree with the statement in the first paragraph which sets you up for a contradiction. Your options include using the third person: The statement provided suggests . . . OR be more clear: Certainly it is quite common or it is often the case ….

Task #2: this task is incomplete. While this paragraph seems consistent with the rest of the essay, it seems you have misread the statement provided. Here you should be providing an example of acceptable risk. And, in fact, the example of cancer treatment is far more logical here (not in the first paragraph) because all major cancer treatments include the risk of death.

Task #3: inconsistent with the statement provided. Be sure you review the 5 minute, 5 step procedure described in the Lessons section and focus on the tasks. You write very well and generate many ideas. As long as you focus on the tasks, you should get an excellent score.

Two Independent Markers:

Score #1: 3/6

Score #2: 3/6

Overall Letter Grade: N

For a clearer definition of the meaning of a score out of 6, look at the last section of the first lesson for The Writing Sample in The Gold Standard MCAT or below:

6/6: Thorough exploration of the topic and fully addressed tasks are features of six point essays. These essays show depth, structure, excellent vocabulary and sentence control as well as coherent focused organization.

5/6: All tasks are addressed by the essay. The treatment of the subject is substantial but not as thorough as for a six point essay. While some depth, structure and good vocabulary and sentence control is exhibited, this is at a lower level than for a six point essay.

4/6: All three tasks are addressed but the topic is given only a moderate exploration. Clarity of thought is present but some digression is seen although the text is structured. The quality of the vocabulary and of the sentence structure is adequate.

3/6: The essay distorts or neglects one of the three tasks. The issue may be only minimally treated. The essay demonstrates basic control of sentence structure and vocabulary, but the language may not serve to adequately forward the writer's thoughts. The essay may show organization but may be classified as simplistic.

2/6: The essay completely fails to address adequately one or more of the tasks. There may be recurring mechanical errors (i.e. spelling and grammar). Problems with analysis and organization are typical.

1/6: Problems with organization and mechanics in these essays make it very difficult for the reader to follow them. The essay may fail to address the topic entirely.

The essay is scored by two readers on a scale of 1 (lowest) to 6 (highest). The combined scores from the two essays (2 to 12 out of 12) are then converted to a scale ranging from J (lowest) to T (highest):

J (2), K (3), L (4), M (5), N (6), O (7), P (8 ), Q (9), R (10), S (11), T (12)