Every semester at my high school, we have to write these "anchor" essays. They are called "anchor" essays because they are usually around 10% to 15% of the grade in humanities and usually drop peoples' grades. Written over the course of two weeks in class, we are supposed to argue a point using the documents that are given to us . For my first anchor, we had to write about the Enlightenment. The prompt was, "show how the ideas articulated by Enlightenment philosophers changed the traditional views on society and government." It took me a long time to think this over, but I finally came up with the thesis, "The ideas pioneered during the Enlightenment broke ties with tradition- instilling a new sense of individualism upon the masses." In my essay, I argued that by empowering the people with individualism, the Enlightenment changed the structure of society.
I was surprised to see a 79% when I got my paper back. Red markings were my history teacher's, black markings were from my language teacher. My paper was full of red. I talked to my history teacher to see where I went wrong, and he said that he was specifically looking for the "traditional views, enlightenment views, and effects" organization for the body paragraphs. He even said the grade I got was "probably higher than you deserved." I looked at the essays that got good grades, and I saw that they all had the same idea. Basically, they argued that the enlightenment changed society, not how it changed society.This one kid, who played computer games the whole time said he just took the prompt and wrote, "The ideas of the Enlightenment philosophers changed traditional views on government and society" for his thesis. He got an 89%
Sure I could see errors in my writing, but really? A C+? It's really been eating away at me. I worked really hard on that essay and ended up with a crappy grade, while this other guy just dogs the whole thing and almost gets an A. Is there really any argument in saying that the Enlightenment "changed society"? It's like arguing that a leaf changes color in autumn. Using the "traditional, enlightenment, after" is like explaining that at first the leaf is green, then it turns red, and then if falls to the ground. It's undoubtedly true, so is that even an essay, or just a written time line? Where is the thinking in that?
It bothers me.
I was surprised to see a 79% when I got my paper back. Red markings were my history teacher's, black markings were from my language teacher. My paper was full of red. I talked to my history teacher to see where I went wrong, and he said that he was specifically looking for the "traditional views, enlightenment views, and effects" organization for the body paragraphs. He even said the grade I got was "probably higher than you deserved." I looked at the essays that got good grades, and I saw that they all had the same idea. Basically, they argued that the enlightenment changed society, not how it changed society.This one kid, who played computer games the whole time said he just took the prompt and wrote, "The ideas of the Enlightenment philosophers changed traditional views on government and society" for his thesis. He got an 89%
Sure I could see errors in my writing, but really? A C+? It's really been eating away at me. I worked really hard on that essay and ended up with a crappy grade, while this other guy just dogs the whole thing and almost gets an A. Is there really any argument in saying that the Enlightenment "changed society"? It's like arguing that a leaf changes color in autumn. Using the "traditional, enlightenment, after" is like explaining that at first the leaf is green, then it turns red, and then if falls to the ground. It's undoubtedly true, so is that even an essay, or just a written time line? Where is the thinking in that?
It bothers me.