Many students struggle with the process of evaluating and commenting on the evidence and arguments presented in the two opposing texts which they must discuss in the argumentative essay on the GED RLA test. This article highlights common mistakes using an example of a student essay.
A common mistake is that students quote directly from the text, or restate what the texts say, without evaluating the information given and using it to support THEIR own argument about which text presents the most compelling arguments.
Down below is an example of a student’s essay, with comments and corrections added to illustrate this point. You can see that in multiple places the student restated or even directly quoted passages from the given texts, but did not explain how this information is persuasive or not.
In this case, Text A argued that Organic Foods are Healthier and the other text, Text B was titled, Organic Foods are a Scam!
Understanding the delicate skill of taking two opposing arguments and using them selectively to compose your own, third argumentative essay, in which you compare them and evaluate the evidence given is a challenge in which most students have very little, if any prior experience.
Not surprisingly then, this seems to be where most student’s struggle and fall short, even though they can write fairly well. This is why we offer an additional short tutorial, Acing the Argumentative Essay on the GED – to help you develop and fine-tune these very specific skills! Don’t tackle the GED RLA Exam without it!
Corrections and edits to the original student’s essay are indicated by the strikethroughs and words and comments added in bold.
Student Essay
There is a long standing debate between eating organic foods versus not eating organic foods. Text A shows why to eat researched evidence that supports the benefits of eating organic foods. While text B shows why not to eat suggests that labelling and belief affects how we perceive organic foods and argues that there is little difference between organic and non-organic food. The debate goes on between Text A and Text B. (This is a redundant sentence.) Although Text B has some interesting arguments, the passage of Text A is more convincing overall.
The main reason why Text A is more convincing is the fact that Text A reports has research done on the subject (Mmm?? so does text B but I think its actually the KIND of research reported in Text A that is more compelling. The research quoted in Text A looked at measurable benefits rather than perceptions of organic food). An example of this is a Swedish study that found that strawberries contain much more vitamin C and antioxidant phenols. These results indicate that eating organic fruits is beneficial. This counts for all fruits that are is not injected with chemicals or contaminated with microbes. While Text B mentions has Swedish researchers that concluded that choosing a lifestyle based on an organic diet constitutes a return to the natural world on a philosophical level, whereas on a psychological level it connects one to aspects such as identity, values, and well-being. This argument is not very compelling as philosophy and psychology are not easily proven using scientific methods (or something like that! – Comment on the evidence given, don’t just restate it.)
Another example, of Text A being more supported persuasive (?perhaps – maybe this is just my preference, but I think it sounds better) is from America with 54 samples of study material. Washed or unwashed, salad ingredients from farms, where manure was used, and non-organic farms, where conventional fertilisers were used, were analysed for mircobail contamination. Both farming methods produced similar microbial counts such as bacteria, yeast, and moulds ect. This (I think this deleted section is too much quoting from the text, instead of commenting on it, so I’ve cut and edited it as follows:) the data from an American study of microbial counts, which indicates that organically grown foods are not more likely contaminated with microbes than foods grown by standard methods and are just as safe, if not safer. While Text B states nothing to contradict this. (It doesn’t have to. You should discuss what Text B DOES do and why it is not as compelling. I’ll have a go to give you the idea:) In comparison, Text B focuses on studies which measured the expectations, beliefs and reactions of consumers to different foods and the way the foods and drinks were presented to them. The data showed that participants could not tell the difference from tasting organic versus inorganic foods, but these studies do not address the researched health benefits of organic foods.
In contrast, Text B tells us that if on a blue plate the people can’t taste the food difference between process foods and organic foods. Men who is are red-green color blind can’t taste food the same way as people who can see blue, red and green because the color plays a big role in the taste. The way people interpet taste is partly from the color, if you cant see the color of the food your mind can’t make interpretations of how it will taste. (Why is this evidence not very convincing? Don’t just rewrite what the text says, you need to evaluate it and state why it is or isn’t as convincing as the other text, like in the last bold sentence above – just because you can’t taste the difference doesn’t mean there isn’t a difference from a health and nutrition perspective.)
In conclusion, while Text B has some valid points and arguments such as so-called organic foods being contaminated by chemicals from neighbouring crops as well as problems with agricultural inspections and standards not being upheld, (you can concede any strong points in the weaker text and mention them and comment on them, here in the conclusion or elsewhere in an essay) Text A shows more evidence for eating organic foods and staying healthy. Text A scites studies from America and Sweden that show measurable data that confirm the benefits of are both for eating organic foods, Wwhile (make it one sentence so it is grammatically correct) Text B is based on one weak argument and opinions. Ultimately, text A is more convincing.
Get more coaching and practice for Acing the Argumentative Essay on the GED in this short course today!
Also read: Tips for Acing the Argumentative Essay on the GED to see another essay critique.