Victory for the ACT Student Text 15e

182 • W RITING

Organization: • The writer brings up three separate arguments in the introduction but fails to combine them into a cohesive thesis. Ȉ Ž–Š‘—‰Š –Š‡ ˆ‘—”–Š ’ƒ”ƒ‰”ƒ’Š „‡‰‹• ™‹–Š ƒ –”ƒ•‹–‹‘ ȋŠ‘™‡˜‡”Ȍǡ –Š‹• –”ƒ•‹–‹‘ ‹• not enough to link it to the two previous body paragraphs. An effective transition must acknowledge the preceding idea and connect it to the idea that follows. Ȉ – ‹• ‘–…Ž‡ƒ” ™Š‡–Š‡” –Š‡ ϐ‹ƒŽ ’ƒ”ƒ‰”ƒ’Š ‘ˆ –Š‡ ‡••ƒ› ‹• ƒ…‘…Ž—•‹‘ ‘” ƒ –Š‹”† „‘†› paragraph. The writer needs a conclusion that summarizes the thesis and recalls all main points of the essay. Language Use and Conventions: Ȉ Š‡ ‡••ƒ›…‘–ƒ‹• •‘‡ —•ƒ‰‡ ƒ† ‡…Šƒ‹…• ‡””‘”•ǣ ጖ ‘†› ’ƒ”ƒ‰”ƒ’Š ʹǣ Dz ‘—Ž†ǯ– ™ƒ– –‘ Ž‹˜‡ ‹ ƒ…‘—‹–› –Šƒ– ™ƒ• Šƒ”‡† „› ˆ”ƒ…‹‰dz ‹• ƒ •‡–‡…‡ ˆ”ƒ‰‡–Ǥ ጖ Š‡ ϐ‹ƒŽ ’ƒ”ƒ‰”ƒ’Š —•‡• –Š‡ ˜‡”„ Dz…‹–‡•dz ‹•–‡ƒ† ‘ˆ –Š‡ ‘— Dz•‹–‡•Ǥdz Ȉ Š‡ ‡••ƒ› —•‡• ˜ƒ‰—‡ Žƒ‰—ƒ‰‡ǣ ጖ –”‘†—…–‹‘ǣ  –Š‡ •‡…‘† •‡–‡…‡ǡ ‹– ‹• —…Ž‡ƒ” ™Šƒ– Dz™‡dz ƒ† Dz–Š‹‰dz ”‡ˆ‡” –‘Ǥ ጖ ‘†› ’ƒ”ƒ‰”ƒ’Š ͳ —•‡• ƒ ˜ƒ‰—‡ ’”‘‘—Ǥ •–‡ƒ† ‘ˆ •ƒ›‹‰ Dz ‡˜‡ Š‡ƒ”† –Šƒ– ‹–…‘—Ž†…ƒ—•‡ ‡ƒ”–Š“—ƒ‡•ǡdz –Š‡ ™”‹–‡” •Š‘—Ž† •ƒ›ǡ Dz ‡˜‡ Š‡ƒ”† –Šƒ– ˆ”ƒ…‹‰ …‘—Ž†…ƒ—•‡ ‡ƒ”–Š“—ƒ‡•Ǥdz ȋ  –Š‡ ’”‡˜‹‘—• •‡–‡…‡ǡ –Š‡ ™”‹–‡” †‘‡• ‘– mention fracking.) Ȉ Š‡ ™”‹–‡” •Š‘—Ž† ƒ˜‘‹† ”‡’‡–‹–‹˜‡ Žƒ‰—ƒ‰‡Ǥ ȋ šƒ’Ž‡ ˆ”‘ „‘†› ’ƒ”ƒ‰”ƒ’Š ͳǣ ‡‘’Ž‡ who argue against fracking argue that it causes environmental problems.) Summary and Conclusions: The essay lacks a clear thesis and presents contradicting arguments. The body paragraphs also do not have enough evidence to support their arguments. This essay would likely receive a score of 5.