MCAT Writing Sample Corrected 6

[jeanne7524]

Prompt: In a democracy, the successful politician resembles the ordinary citizen.


The composition of the Republican and Democratic parties sometimes vary in their racial, economic, and gender compositions. It is often assumed that a white male in the upper class associates more strongly with the Republicans, whereas an African American female in working class votes for the Democrats. In the recent presidential election, the major candidates for the Democratic Party were Obama and Clinton, who were Black and female, respectively. On the other hand, the major candidate for the Republicans was a white male as expected.

Where did this stereotype come from? It originates in the belief that a candidate who has more in common with oneself will better represent his or her needs. People want a politician who will be considerate of their needs when making decisions. Therefore, it would be reasonable to conclude that the politician resembling the ordinary citizen would be chosen to be a representative, because the ordinary citizen, which is therefore the majority, would vote for him or her. For example, Barack Obama, who was chosen to be the president of the United States in the recent election, is a Black male. Although it was a close election, voters who were racial minorities, younger, or in the lower economic status supported him in hopes of being better represented by a candidate who has features in common with them.

However, a politician who resembles the ordinary citizen may not be successful in some cases, because there are other factors. For example, in the very same election, Hilary Clinton was not as successful although she was representing the same party. She was a female candidate, a characteristic that is in common with half of the population in the country. That trait should have been made her a more likely candidate than Obama, whose trait as an African American was not shared with as large fraction of the population. Nonetheless, she was not as successful in the running, because there were other factors, including the public’s readiness to take a woman as a president.

In conclusion, it is not necessarily the resemblance or the politician to the ordinary citizen that determines the success. Rather, it would be the inclusiveness and considerateness that the politician shows for the ordinary citizen. Sometimes, the public assumes that a politician who has more in common with itself will be better representative of its needs. This can lead to the success of a politician resembling the general public. However, because there are other factors and ways to show that he or she will represent the voters well, the resemblance to the ordinary citizen does not always guarantee the success of the politician.


Ideas:

There is potential in the argument presented, but the student needs to provide supporting details in order to make the main points of the essay more logical.

Technical Errors:
Although there were a few grammatical errors found, these lapses contributed to the confusion of ideas in the essay.


Task 1:
There was a little mix up or ambiguity in the way the first paragraph presented its ideas about the stereotypes of American presidential candidates. The student could have been clearer in explaining the prompt. The ineffective handling of language was one factor for the student’s impediment. For example, paragraph 2 stated that the stereotype of party candidates “originates in the belief that a candidate who has more in common with oneself will better represent his or her needs”. I am not sure if the statement meant that the candidate has many things in common with his or her own self or with the voters. No definite thesis is established either.

Task 2:
The antithesis needs to be stronger. The student mentioned that there are other factors why a candidate may not be successful even if he or she has features in common with the majority of the population. However, no mention of specific factors was made.

Task 3:
Because the preceding paragraphs did not present a good argument, this resulted to a weak resolution.

TWO INDEPENDENT MARKERS:
Score #1: 2/6
Score #2: 1/6
Overall Letter Grade: J

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)