Television Argument!
You have probably experienced a time, when you couldn’t tear your eyes away from the television and could sit hours eagerly absorbing whatever show was on at that moment in time. Sometimes, an hour would turn in four and you might fall asleep with your eyes still glued to your television screen. Although there can be something you can gain from watching selective television shows, there are many disadvantages of watching television. Living without a television for a week might seem awful, however, there are plenty of reasons why this could benefit you.
This is a preview of the whole essay
Peer Reviews
Here's what a star student thought of this essay
Quality of writing
The Quality of Written Communication is average. The answer would be perfect if the candidate didn't repeatedly put comma splice in almost every other sentence. The opening sentence, for example: "You have probably experienced a time, when you couldn't tear your eyes away from the television...". The comma in this sentence isn't needed. This grammatical inefficiency is featured throughout the essay and, with the removal of it, the answer could be strengthened further.
Level of analysis
The Level of Analysis, or rather, Advice given here is very sensitive of the recipient's own opinions; that no TV "might seem awful" and that it can be hard to not watch TV. To start, the candidate does very well to empathise with how good TV can actually be, and then explains how not all TV is good. This is a good way of approaching an advisory question because you are relating to the reader as someone who has been in the same position before. It's like when you give up smoking - you trust the opinions of someone who has successfully quit rather than someone who has never smoked in their life. By showing this empathy, the candidate displays the first step to a good advisory answer. The candidate then goes on to explains the benefits of cutting out TV for a week, though I would argue there isn't quite the time to "experience new things such as taste new foods, see new sites" or the like, but most of their alternatives are well-thought through and expressed so as to give the impression they can give healthy alternatives. However, it might have been better to provide an expert opinion - real or fake (but plausible either way) - to show evidence of external research and that the candidate has discussed the topic matter with professionals. After the TV-less week, the candidate doesn't just stop there; she provides a well-planned follow-up to the week of TV absence by suggesting cutting back slightly on the "bad TV" (a few examples such as reality TV, no-brainer TV and a few bad soaps would have been applicable here). All in all the advice given is very good.
Response to question
This is a question asking candidate to write and article of advice about why a week without TV is good for you. Though very systematic and step-by-step, there is a thorough use of all the tools available for an effective advice article, with all points made pertaining to how cutting out TV can benefit you. Whilst voicing her own view, this candidate also adopts the view of someone who might retort at the idea of cutting out TV for a week - this is where the most marks lie. In being able to Response to the Question with proper advice, the candidate needs to understand the perspective of the people they are giving advice to - would you want advice from someone who has no idea what they were talking about?
