Japan’s investment in R&D is high. Despite this, Japanese research output is diminishing. Why is this happening? A hierarchical educational system, and lack opportunities and platforms for outer collaboration are among the reasons for this decline. International collaboration will play a crucial role in helping Japan increase the quality ad quantity of its research output. […]
WPA Sample Essays and Their Scores
Introduction to Sample Essays
These samples are provided to give you a better sense of what evaluators’ scores actually mean. By analyzing these essays and the evaluators’ comments, you may become more aware of what is expected and how you might write the best essay you possibly can.
Please note that the following essays specifically analyze the article “No More Curtain Calls for Elephants” by the Los Angeles Times ’ editorial board. The analyses that show up in the following essays apply uniquely to this article. While other authors may employ some of the same strategies, they will do so in a broad multiplicity of ways. Your analysis of strategies, assumptions, etc. therefore, must be relevant to the specific article that has been assigned. Memorizing and copying any of the analyses that show up below will cause you to receive a lower score and raise the issue of plagiarism. Please do not put yourself in that position. Instead, read the essays below to understand how to better accomplish the writing task being asked of you in the WPA.
Essays with a combined score of:
Essay with a combined score of Ten
“No More Curtain Calls for Elephants,” an article published in the Los Angeles Times ’ newspaper and composed by its own editorial board, brings the issue of domestic elephant mistreatment to light and announces its support of the Los Angeles City Council’s consideration of a measure that would promote domestic elephant welfare. In writing a story that was most instantly available and applicable to Los Angeles residents, the LA Times’ editorial board hopes to bring more awareness of the problem to the community and at the same time create a broader base of support for the City Council measure.
The LA Times’ editorial board uses two strategies to appeal to Los Angeles readers. Very first, the board includes a description of the average weight, age, and health complications that apply to domestic elephants in an effort to appeal to their sense of logic: “For 8,000-to-10,000-pound creatures who spend all day on their feet and can live into their 40s, the consequence of confinement was a painful middle age, marked by arthritis, cracked toenails, and sore feet.” The use of quantifiable characteristics of the animals and evidence of real problems that result from the current state of their treatment makes the issue more substantial for readers. The presentation of data such as this makes for an argument that readers would find unworthy of their energy and unconvincing otherwise.
The board also uses ethos to appeal to the audience’s respect for authority. They mention and intrinsically agree with an instruction of the Association of Zoos and Aquariums to its member facilities to adopt the limitation of keepers sharing space with elephants. By referring to an organization that has more practice with and is more knowledgeable about animals and subsequently agreeing with its propositions, the board validates its position and suggests the reader hold the position as well, or even respect the position at the least. Due to the fact that many LA residents are average, working-class Americans, it is likely they will respect the authority of the Association of Zoos and Aquariums.
The editorial board’s argument is based on two assumptions that may reduce their position’s validity in the eyes of the reader. An assumption that is implied across the article is the idea that elephants are the victims of the domestic mistreatment and in this way are portrayed as feeble and defenseless and overall benevolent creatures, especially when they describe the elephants as “gentle giants” and “plucky warriors in battle.” While this may be true in one sense, they neglect another demonstrable truth of the evident danger elephants present to humans. Their simply enormous physical state overpowers that of people, which permits for the possibility of keepers being hurt—and more importantly—not having the physical capabilities to care for the animals in certain ways. If this idea was mentioned, readers may more readily find the issue more valid and worth their concern.
Another assumption the board infers is that improvement of domestic elephants’ lives in captivity is the only solution to the issue. There are other solutions that they failed to mention, for example, the suggestion of permitting elephants in captivity to be released back to their natural habitats, away from their human keepers and the issue of domestic mistreatment altogether. By failing to propose more than the solution of supporting the LA City Council’s measure to promote captive elephants’ welfare, the issues is made to seem less genuine to readers’ eyes and perhaps based in political or financial motives rather than what is truly best for the elephants.
In conclusion, while the LA Times’ editorial board may have compiled the articles on the basis of some misleading premises, the organization and strategies that were applied made their argument effective overall. The ethos and logos used by the board enlargened the credibility of the argument. LA residents are likely to consider the issue of domestic elephant mistreatment more critically than they would if they had not read the article, and may even go as far as to support the City Council’s measure of mistreatment and prevention.
Based on the WPA Scoring Guide, this paper meets upper division writing proficiency and demonstrates that this student possesses the reading, writing, and critical thinking abilities expected of graduates of San Diego State University. The essay not only fulfills the criteria for a score of Ten, but also does so with thought and valid reasons voiced in effective language and clear structure. The paper addresses all aspects of the prompt and offers specific details to give sufficient analytical support, creating effective communication with the audience. In addition, the paper is well written with few distracting errors.
A strength of the essay is its awareness of audience. For example, in paragraphs 1, Three, Four, and 7, the writer specifically mentions that audience members are Los Angeles residents and connects that information to their potential response to the editorial. In addition, in structuring the essay, the writer does not merely go after the order of the questions introduced in the prompt, but synthesizes the information to organize it in a way that best suits the writer’s purpose.
The writer also demonstrates a clear understanding of the editorial’s argument. Paragraph Two shows a sophisticated understanding of the issue when the writer boils the comparison down to “what the elephants’ lives are and what they have a right to be.” After this comment, the writer provides several details about the elephants’ “right to live.” The writer also provides a specific statement of the effect of the details on the audience.
In the analysis of the very first persuasive strategy, the writer does not explicitly name it. However, the author describes it well enough that evaluators do not need a name to know what the writer is discussing. The writer also uses this level of detail for the 2nd strategy when discussing how the editorial board’s use of the Association of Zoos and Aquariums enhances the board’s credibility because the audience would likely respect this organization.
The writer also identifies and analyzes two potential assumptions upon which the argument is based. In each case, the author provides detailed examples and demonstrates active thinking and critical engagement with the argument.
Essay with a combined score of 8
Elephants are popularly used in America in entertainment and exhibitions, such as circuses and zoos. In the 2012 article, “No More Curtain Call for Elephants,” the LA Times ’ editorial board argues that elephants should be protected from use in traveling shows and exhibitions in Los Angeles through the passing of a measure to prevent this use. This article was published in the Los Angeles Times. Through the use of persuasive strategies such as pathos and the use of examples, the authors build a wooing argument on why the measure should be passed. The article reaches a broad audience of the readers of the Los Angeles Times in order to inform the residents of the city of the measure and why it should be passed. Also, the board wishes to explain the argument to the City Council who will determine if the measure will be passed, as well as the employees and audiences of elephant exhibitions. I will now examine the extent of the effectiveness of the argument made by the LA Times editorial board to pass this measure.
The authors make appeals to emotion in order to further their argument. The reason they believe the measure should be passed is because elephants in traveling shows and exhibitions are mistreated. By explaining to the reader about the harsh living conditions and manhandle these animals face, the authors seek to stir up empathy in the in the reader. The thought of a gentle giant being struck with a acute object and chained in a box while standing on concrete surfaces causes the reader to feel for these elephants and agree with the argument to pass the measure. The use of pathos furthers the argument made by the board because it explains why the measure is needed by the elephants in these conditions. An example of an emotional appeal made in the article is seen as the board states, “For 8,000-to-10,000-pound creatures who spend all day on their feet and can live into their 40s, the consequence of that confinement was a painful middle age, marked by arthritis, cracked toenails, and sore feet.” This explanation helps the reader understand why a measure was created to prohibit the use of elephants as entertainment and why it should be passed.
The authors use many examples in order to further their argument. The reasons they think the measure should be passed are given by stating factual examples of why the use of elephants in shows and exhibitions is unfair to the animals. One of the examples used is a testimony from Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus of how they do not mistreat their animals. The article states, “Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus has long defended its use of elephants, telling they are meticulously cared for on the road and at its conservations center in Florida.” The authors go on to explain how this company actually doe not treat their elephants well. They explain, “ ‘But Ringling still chains its elephants in trains to transport them and uses bullhooks to manage them. ’ ” This example again furthers the argument because it explains how circuses do not treat the elephants well and why the measure should be passed. The reader gets a further understanding of the argument because of the examples used.
The editorial board makes the assumption that all people think elephants are majestic and noble creatures who deserve to be treated with respect. Many people have a excellent appreciation for animals and do not tolerate animal manhandle. This assumption helps make a connection with the reader. If people who appreciate and respect the elephant are made aware of the manhandle it faces, they are more likely to call for switch and support the measure as well.
I find the argument to be coaxing. The author uses many examples to illustrate why the measure should be passed. The use of pathos helps to create an emotional relationship with the reader and the feelings of empathy created persuade the reader that the measure should be passed. However, the authors do not attack all zoos and circuses for mistreating the elephants. It is explained how the the Los Angeles Zoo and the Association of Zoos and Aquariums are working to fix the problems. Before reading this article, I was not aware of the use of bullhooks and the extent of harm done to elephants as a result of traveling shows and exhibits. The article brings awareness to the issued in a respectable way and convinces the reader of why the use of elephants as entertainment needs to end.
The strengths of this paper include that it addresses all questions within the prompt, and each question is placed in a well-structured paragraph, creating a functional organization. In addition, specific suitable examples are provided to support the analysis. For example, the writer selected a quotation that undoubtedly shows an emotional appeal when he/she includes the example of the “8,000-10,000 pound creatures” with sore feet. The essay also does a solid job of explaining the editorial board’s argument.
In terms of areas to improve, the essay’s analysis could be more fully developed. The discussion of the board’s use of emotional appeals in paragraph Two does discuss why such appeals are used. However, it could provide a more detailed explanation of how they function in the article and in terms of the target audience. The writer then discusses the board’s uses of “many examples” in the third paragraph. Here, the writer may want to be more specific and identify a specific type of example that seems to be used effectively. The writer eventually does this, noting the “testimony” from Ringling Bros. and the author does attempt to response how the example functions in the argument in the final sentence. To strengthen the analysis, the writer may want to explain more fully how and why the particular examples are working to persuade the audience. In addition, the essay could provide more discussion of the intended audience. which would demonstrate an awareness of the board’s communicative intent.
Albeit the essay does identify an assumption in the article, it could more fully analyze the article’s assumptions and explain what they might mean in terms of the intended audience. The more limited development of this aspect of the prompt is apparent when comparing this essay to the previous one.
Overall, the student writer meets junior-level competency and is ready to take a more rigorous upper division “W” course.
Essay with a combined score of 6
“No more Curtain Calls for Elephants” was an article written by the L.A. Times’ editorial board. The article’s main argument is rather ordinary—“elephants are majestic animals, not performers. The City Council should act to protect them.” The author attempted to connect the reader with the elephants. The author also uses examples of elephant protection to demonstrate the reader what can come with progress.
The very first persuasive strategy the author uses is attempting to connect the reader with the elephant. The argument starts off rather basic, stating the problem of the argument. Soon thereafter the author adds an affectionate twist to their words in order to connect with us and the elephant. “A growing appreciation for the world’s largest and Most majestic land mammal.” Simply by adding this little play of words, draws readers’ sympathy for the animal, already providing them a sort of bias feeling from the beginning. If you commence by feeling sorry for the animal, chances are you are going to support whatever it is they are pushing. Another strategy the author uses to attempt and woo his reader is displaying there is a definite improvement to the treating of elephants, but not enough.
Many zoos are embarking to have “protected contracts” with the elephants. Zoos are no longer chaining up their elephants at night. Elephant enclosures have gotten much larger and more convenient for the elephants. The Los Angeles Zoo spent over $40 million building a fresh habitat for their elephants. The author states that even tho’ these improvements are fine, the fact that they still have to be trained to do things is not gentle. He argues that “elephants are not horses,” meaning there indeed is no such thing as a domesticated elephant. And getting any undomesticated animal to do anything takes training, which equals force. So even tho’ the elephants are being treated much better as a entire, we are still forcing unnatural processes upon them.
Personally, I find this particular article fairly coaxing. The persuasive strategies that the author used indeed hit home for me because I am an animal paramour. Which is what I believe the author was truly going for. Not only were their strategies persuasive, the way it was organized was in itself persuasive. The author does a good job of truly making the reader feel sorry for the elephants in the beginning. Explaining what elephants do in the wild and why they are chained up. They then proceed to make the reader feel a little better about the elephant’s situation. They explain the improvements made for elephants and the fresh programs in place that will help protect them. Almost in the same breath, they add that these improvements are not enough. This tactic works beautifully because it indeed gives the reader a false sense of hope. The reader starts off feeling sorry for the elephants, followed by a sense of uplift while reading about the improvements made. Then it’s right back to feeling sorry for the elephant again. This I think indeed reinforces their argument to readers that things need to be done now.
Overall this essay certainly did its job of persuading me, the reader, that improvements have to be made regarding elephants. Their tactics of persuasion were very wooing, as was the way the article was organized. Very first, they made the reader feel sorry for the elephants. Then they raised the spirits just a tad. And then it was right back to feeling bad again. This essay (article) was very good at persuading me of what it was attempting to persuade me of.
This response starts off well with information about the editorial board’s claim and a paragraph that shows how the authors attempt to get the reader involved in the issue. The strengths of the essay include that it demonstrates an understanding of the prompt and attempts to address most of the questions in the prompt. It also moves in the right direction in terms of explaining the authors’ argument, and it is fairly well organized.
However, based on the WPA scoring criteria, a significant limitation of this exam is its depth of analysis. particularly concerning persuasive strategies. For example, albeit the writer attempts to address the emotional appeal of the essay in the 2nd paragraph, he or she does not fully discuss why and how such strategies are persuasive. In addition, in the third paragraph the author mentions that in the last fifteen years there have been improvements in the treatment of elephants. In this paragraph, the essay primarily summarizes some of the switches. However, the author does not framework the discussion in terms of why the authors mention these switches and how they function in terms of persuading the audience that the Los Angeles City Council should prohibit public elephant spectacles and the use of bullhooks. Further, a typo or misunderstanding of a concept in the third paragraph makes it difficult for the reader to go after. For example, the essay states, “Many zoos are kicking off to have ‘protected contracts’ with the elephants.” However, the article mentions that at the L.A. Zoo, keepers maintain “protected contact” with elephants, “meaning that man and pachyderm uncommonly share the same space.” In this paragraph, the author mentions the concept of “protected contact” but does not explain what it is and how it relates to the editorial board’s argument.
In addition, the essay does not react to all aspects of the prompt. namely it does not address the assumptions on which the argument is based.
THE WORLD OF TREE FREE PAPER
by Gerard Gleason
Tree free paper (also known as nonwood paper) is a product that we have seen interest in ebb and flow over the years.
Periodically a fresh product will come along that will pique curiosity and interest, but wide-spread long-term consumer loyalty needed to establish tree free paper as a viable alternative to timber based paper has been sorely lacking.
It hasn’t helped the cause of establishing a market for tree free paper that there have been challenging environmental arguments over such issues as on-purpose cultivation of alternative fibers versus only utilization of agricultural by-products.
Whatever the case, the fact remains that tree free fiber presently makes up an immeasurably puny amount of the North American printing & writing paper market. For that matter, recycled fiber use in printing & writing paper still needs considerable market growth also.
While the Conservatree Guide to Environmental Paper lists some tree free papers, we present this extra information in an effort to guide those interested in obtaining tree free papers.
Leaders in Tree Free Paper
Presently there are some stalwart producers, marketers and distributors of their own sensational tree free papers. Some of these papers are 100% alternative fibers and some are a blend of recycled and tree free fiber.
EcoSource has been marketing a specialty hemp paper that is 100% nonwood. The paper is converted for printing and stationery with envelopes, as well as invitation style and other paper products.
Printing & Stationery Paper
Freshly Developed Tree Free Products
Developing tree free papers takes ingenuity and passion.
In addition to some of the above-mentioned leaders in tree free paper such as Vision Paper Co. and Living Tree Paper Co. Al Wong of Arbokem has been one of those uncommon people in the paper industry who has strived to switch the paradigm that paper needs to be made from trees.
Presently, Arbokem is working to reintroduce its tree free paper production under the brand name Xativa. Status of printing paper production can be made via inquiry to Arbokem.
Hemp & Recycled content blend
Artisan Paper Products
A fresh twist on recycling and tree free paper is being developed by a vintage/used clothing business.
Remains, Inc. based in St. Louis, MO, has launched Arch Paper. which is turning unsellable clothing into 100% postconsumer content cotton rag paper. While textile and fabric scraps have been used for paper production for years, paper mills such as Crane & Co use industrial textile scraps (and in come cases items such as linens from hotels and hospitals). But the treatment by Remains, Inc. emerges to be making paper out of by-products (used clothing) once they cannot make “higher and best use” of the material as second-hand, usable clothing. This truly is recycling and tree free paper.
Unsold second-hand clothing textiles
Still More Directions
The quest to save trees and eliminate the use of forest fiber for paper production has reached further than just a come back to the past. Paper was originally produced from plant fiber, the recovery and use of cotton and linen rags, as well as the recycling of old paper. But newer innovations in producing printable substrate in the past few years have been brought to our attention here at Conservatree. While these papers are not presently on our listing of environmental papers, we will discuss them here because the term “tree free paper” has been applied to these products.
There are presently a few paper products that are made entirely of minerals with some roping agents and no cellulose fiber. Some of these products are marketed as “tree free” and many are generically stated to be made from “rocks” or “stone.” The truth is that these papers are made largely of minerals.
The use of minerals in paper production is nothing fresh. Most papers contain some amount of minerals such as calcium carbonate (marble). Glazed papers (such as glossy magazine paper) contain large amounts of additives like calcium carbonate and kaolin (clay) glazing, typically up to half the weight of the paper, in addition to the cellulose fiber.
In fact, the use of minerals in paper production has enlargened so much that, in addition to the concern among environmental organizations over timber and forest issues, paper companies and paper users are hearing from environmental groups organized around issues of mining and mineral resource depletion. A front page article in the Wall Street Journal in October of 2002 highlighted some of these issues.
Certainly the issue of sustainability comes into play when debating harvesting timber from the forest or mining minerals from the ground. Whether a particular paper is made entirely from minerals, the larger picture is that the entire paper industry is ever increasingly utilizing mineral additives in paper production.
The question we have to ask is, “Do we cut more trees or dig more earth or can we minimize both?” Quickly we come back to the issue of sustainability.
Here is information on (entirely) mineral based paper
A few years ago, the book Cradle to Cradle, by William McDonough and Michael Braungart, had an introduction chapter titled, “This Book Is Not A Tree.” Noticeable about the book, other than that it significantly weighs more than any similar 200-page book, is that the pages have a slick and indestructible quality. In fact, the cover says “water proof.”
The book says it is not made from wood pulp, but rather from “plastic resins and inorganic fillers.” The book discusses overall design for sustainability, including the recycling or, rather, the intentional reproduction of products, such as, in this case, a specific book back into another book.
When the book came out, Conservatree had a few inquires about the paper used for Cradle to Cradle. The material used is a version of a thermoplastic polymer film.
In theory, it can be recycled, much as a yogurt container can be recycled if it gets to somewhere that makes fresh material out of it, albeit presently there are few or no options.
A Conservatree staffer has a set of United States maps from National Geographic that he purchased in 1975 that are beautifully printed on similar polymer “paper.” The maps are enormously durable and waterproof! Polymer film papers are prefect for durable use items such as maps or printed matter such as a fishing guide, which might get moist.
One of the original uses of polymer film paper was in food packaging. This type of paper has been expanded to printing grade paper use for outdoor advertising, merchandise suspend tags, medical products and, evidently, books intended for “bathtub reading.”
Yupo. a brand of polypropylene “paper,” is widely available from paper merchants in North America. Heavy-weight cover and translucent versions are some of the varieties suggested. Special inks are required for printing.
When exploring the issue of tree free paper and the environment, you may want to consider all the impacts. Similar issues are being explored when considering sustainable forestry and paper production. See: Which Environmental Characteristic Is Best.
Here is the last word in tree free and recycled paper.
Several years ago we began hearing about paper made from reclaimed elephant dung. What is truly amazing is the number of manufacturers of elephant dung paper! Dung from India, Shi Lanka, Thailand and several locations in Africa.
Most of the dung papers are marketed with links to elephant conservation projects. Now there is talk about a panda conservation project attempting to leap onboard the poo-paper bandwagon.
Obviously this is a good novelty item. Placed as “eco-paper,” it is true that this is recycling of a waste product and deals with an issue that has at least been around since mammals emerged from the ocean.
There are just too many sources of elephant dung paper for us to list, so we just suggest you Google “elephant dung paper” to locate your dearest elephants.
Conservatree is a project of Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (SEE).
Copyright 1988-2015 Conservatree