More fun and profit today. I did my second "issue" topic practice for the GRE. I feel like I did a lot better this time, but I definitely still have room for improvement. Chowon gave me a 5 minute warning, which was very helpful. Also, this time, before I wrote, I made a small outline of points. What I found on writing the outline was that, in effort to write the points briefly, I made them too effectively brief. It was after realizing that my essay was too short that I started filling in example stories. Even after that, I had some extra time and thought it was too short, so I wrote the last point off the cuff (the grades given to examples in the study book are proportionate to the length of the example essay). That last point basically became my conclusion, because I forgot to think about how I would conclude it while I was writing my outline. So outlining skills are something I need to work on.

For the record, I don't know if my examples are true. (They are true to the best of my recollection). For the actual test, I'm debating using an entirely fictional set of examples, because the issue topic is not supposed to measure my knowledge of the topic itself, but rather just my comprehension skills. Also, if I use purely fictional examples, I will be less likely to accidentally write something which the judges will know to be false.

Another thing, I'm doing these practice tests at night. It might be best for me to do my next one in the morning sometime to better emulate my state of mind during the test. I have always written better at night. Anyway, here's the work:

[PROMPT]
Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
[/PROMPT]

[ESSAY]
By using the word, "dissuade", rather than a softer word, such as "discourage", the statement seems to imply that it is the responsibility of the educational institution to successfully remove the desire from students to pursue fields wherein they are unlikely to succeed. I'm curious to know how the author of this statement would feel about a hypothetical tenacious or stubborn student who will not be dissuaded.

To the best of my knowledge, there are no proven methods for reliably identifying a person's aptitude for success in a specific field of study during school. Therefore, the burden placed on the educational institution by this statement is one which no educational institution can hope to carry. On the contrary, there are notable examples in history where institutions have failed to assess a person's aptitude. Einstein, for example, famously failed in his elementary math classes.

Furthermore, psychologists have spoken against the practice of using aptitude tests to pidgeon-hole students and force them into fields of study which they may not enjoy. Notably, Dr. Rorschach said that the practice was not only impossible but unethical. Rorschach knew that enjoying a field is a component as great or greater to a persons success than being measurably most apt in the field. The sentiment is identifiably true by means of cursory introspection. If I were compelled to perform a task which I did not enjoy, then the task itself would discourage me from performing it. Paarticipation in the field would include negative reinforcement, which we learn from Pavlov will certainly dissuade me from performing it at all. Having thus been dissuaded both from performing tasks which I enjoy and from performing tasks which I do not enjoy, I cannot imagine that a person would be found optimally productive in society.

The statement issues the responsibility of the institution as a negative task, "to dissuade". The task is therefore by implication achieved by discouragement. Were it rephrased to say, "a responsibility to persuade students to pursue fields of study in which they are likely to succeed", I would find myself more inclined to agree. However, it seems to me that success itself is a positive experience sufficiently tied to a task to motivate its own pursuit. Students therefore compel themselves to do what they are good at by means of trial and error. If success itself not sufficient enough to compel someone to pursue it, that person will not be easily dissuaded from pursuing a lesser success. So, even if it were the responsibility of the institution as it says in the topic statement, the best and only tool institution has to perform its duty is one which is at work without the intervention of the institution.

The responsibility of educational institutions is therefore to educate students by giving them tasks related to different fields. By these means the institution invariably gives students ample opportunity to succeed or fail in a given field, because it provides opportunities for students to meaningfully interact with both the field. These natural successes and failures will prompt the student in the direction wherein the student will be most successful, because the student will naturally be inclined towards the field which he or she enjoys and in which he or she has experienced some success. The balance between pleasure and aptitude is best found in the student's natural behaviors, and hitherto cannot be measured and forced by an institution in any better way.
[/ESSAY]

That's it! See you guys next time!

Now, me and Chowon are going to watch another episode of The Man in the High Castle~~~~ Ooooooooo~~ (spooky sounds)