Practice GAMSAT essay critique and general discussion

ElenaVZ

Member
Hi Havox, thx heaps for your feedback!! I will certainly pay more attention into grammatical problems. Hmm, may i ask, how did you prepare for that section? Do you reckon root memory? I've been practicing a lot, however writing 2 good essasys in an hours still seem to be an impossible mission for me, at least for now it's impossible :p... i guess the UK exam is just going to be a trial this time, although i still hope that i will be able to finish both essasys on that day :p. Anyway, thx so much for your help!!
 

Havox

Sword and Martini Guy!
Emeritus Staff
Hi Havox, thx heaps for your feedback!! I will certainly pay more attention into grammatical problems. Hmm, may i ask, how did you prepare for that section? Do you reckon root memory? I've been practicing a lot, however writing 2 good essasys in an hours still seem to be an impossible mission for me, at least for now it's impossible :p... i guess the UK exam is just going to be a trial this time, although i still hope that i will be able to finish both essasys on that day :p. Anyway, thx so much for your help!!

I didn't do GAMSAT because I entered med after high school so I've never had to prepare for it.
 

rachel273

Lurker
I sat the GAMSAT last year but didn't do very well in the essay section, I am sitting it again this year and I have signed up to METC Institute's essay preparation course. I am doing the 52 essay course and I receive feedback from doctors who also lecture at universities. So far the feedback has been fantastic, so I am really hoping that it will help me improve the essay section! If you are wanting feedback on some essays you should definitely have a look at their essay courses. I hope this helps, sorry I know it isn't direct essay feedback.
 
Hey I was wondering if someone could have a look at this essay I wrote. It's my first go at a GAMSAT essay. I'm not really sure what I'm doing so any help at all would be very much appreciated.

Quote: “To educate a person in the mind but not in morals is to educate a menace to society.”
Common theme: Morality.

The importance of having good morals is often overlooked in today’s society. With the emphasis on being well educated and qualified, not much attention is paid to developing the conscience. To educate someone in the mind, but not to develop their morals can cause them to be a great burden on society. They would behave in ways that are unjust, and even abuse their knowledge for immoral purposes.

Lack of proper morals causes people to behave in ways that are inhumane and evil. Good morals serve as a guide to how one should live life, and lack of them leads to a person going astray and doing wrong. This is often the case with criminals. For instance, consider the arsonists arrested for having contributed to the recent bushfires in New South Wales. They displayed blatant disregard for life, and the wellbeing of the communities involved. Had they been taught to be decent and caring, such catastrophic events could have been avoided. It is important that children are educated from a young age, on what is morally right and wrong. This would instil boundaries within them that prevent disruptive, anti-social behaviour. Not having a good set of principles to abide by causes people to live in an evil manner.

Educating people’s minds but not their conscience leaves room for abuse of the very knowledge their have acquired, to perform bad deeds. Knowledge is a gift that should not be abused. However, a lock of decent morals allows people to use their knowledge to do harm. An example of such behaviour is the case of the infamous British doctor Harold Shipman. He was educated in medicine, but later displayed sheer evil and disregard for human life when he murdered his patients by administering lethal doses of drugs. These are characteristics that should be possessed by no human being, let alone a doctor. The Shipman case is just one instance where knowledge was abused by well educated people to do wrong. It stresses the importance of instilling good qualities and values within people. Educating a person’s sense of what is morally just, is even more important than developing their knowledge.

Some may argue that a person’s morals vary depending on their personality, and teaching them what is right and wrong would be of little use. However, research on the effects of ‘nature vs nurture’ on the personalities of people suggests that one’s upbringing plays a significant role in who they become as a person. In other words, while a person’s characteristics may have genetic roots, the environment in which they developed determines their personality to a great extent. Such findings reaffirm how important it is that people are taught proper morals from a young age, if they are to become good members of society.

If people are educated in mind, but not in terms of their conscience, society faces great problems. Lack of good morals leads to anti-social behaviour, and even abuse of knowledge to do what is wrong. It is important that society looks beyond the current focus on academic qualifications, to develop the more important qualities and values within people – their morality.
 

adomad

Regular Member
Hey I was wondering if someone could have a look at this essay I wrote. It's my first go at a GAMSAT essay. I'm not really sure what I'm doing so any help at all would be very much appreciated.

Quote: “To educate a person in the mind but not in morals is to educate a menace to society.”
Common theme: Morality.

The importance of having good morals is often overlooked in today’s society. With the emphasis on being well educated and qualified, not much attention is paid to developing the conscience. To educate someone in the mind, but not to develop their morals can cause them to be a great burden on society. They would behave in ways that are unjust, and even abuse their knowledge for immoral purposes.

Lack of proper morals causes people to behave in ways that are inhumane and evil. Good morals serve as a guide to how one should live life, and lack of them leads to a person going astray and doing wrong. This is often the case with criminals. For instance, consider the arsonists arrested for having contributed to the recent bushfires in New South Wales. They displayed blatant disregard for life, and the wellbeing of the communities involved. Had they been taught to be decent and caring, such catastrophic events could have been avoided. It is important that children are educated from a young age, on what is morally right and wrong. This would instil boundaries within them that prevent disruptive, anti-social behaviour. Not having a good set of principles to abide by causes people to live in an evil manner.

Educating people’s minds but not their conscience leaves room for abuse of the very knowledge their have acquired, to perform bad deeds. Knowledge is a gift that should not be abused. However, a lock of decent morals allows people to use their knowledge to do harm. An example of such behaviour is the case of the infamous British doctor Harold Shipman. He was educated in medicine, but later displayed sheer evil and disregard for human life when he murdered his patients by administering lethal doses of drugs. These are characteristics that should be possessed by no human being, let alone a doctor. The Shipman case is just one instance where knowledge was abused by well educated people to do wrong. It stresses the importance of instilling good qualities and values within people. Educating a person’s sense of what is morally just, is even more important than developing their knowledge.

Some may argue that a person’s morals vary depending on their personality, and teaching them what is right and wrong would be of little use. However, research on the effects of ‘nature vs nurture’ on the personalities of people suggests that one’s upbringing plays a significant role in who they become as a person. In other words, while a person’s characteristics may have genetic roots, the environment in which they developed determines their personality to a great extent. Such findings reaffirm how important it is that people are taught proper morals from a young age, if they are to become good members of society.

If people are educated in mind, but not in terms of their conscience, society faces great problems. Lack of good morals leads to anti-social behaviour, and even abuse of knowledge to do what is wrong. It is important that society looks beyond the current focus on academic qualifications, to develop the more important qualities and values within people – their morality.
You're*
 
D

Deleted member 20138

Guest
Hi everyone! would love some feedback on my essay. Thank you!
The quote I used was: "Few rich men own their own property. The property owns them.”

The constitutional backbone of human nature may be summarized by various terms: egalitarianism, liberty, love, power, and wealth. For the common man, we are in denial of these symptoms. In order to engage reality, we must succumb to despair, but without denial, there is no hope. Man is the measure of all things. A statement by the ancient Greek philosopher, Protagoras, is commonly interpreted to mean that the individual human being, rather than a God or an unwavering law, is the ultimate source of value. The proposition this quote provides advocates one perspective – that man is invincible. In denying the fact that man is controlled by money, is society simply protecting itself? To legitimize the fact that our lifestyle is fabricated exclusively by money is to admit the dangers inherent in our lives should money be lost. To question the monetary basis of our lifestyle is to challenge the material foundations of western civilization.

Through the globalization of the Anglo-American Empire, the dollar is the world reserve currency. Supporting the settling Petro Dollar trade globally, money is recycled through the City of London and New York. Fundamental assets which include our man-induced labor and natural resources are suppressed by corporate power. The power of the consumerist federal government continues to augment through the fascist, statist, and collectivist model. As we turn the greenback wheel, the growth of the government enriches business superpowers to further pursue their control over workers. As the wheel revolves around a complete cycle, the government enables themselves to control other nations through the Military Industrial Complex.

Mathematically, the dollar collapse is inevitable. Debt-based money can only increase alongside an increase in debt every year, in excess of the debt accrued the year before. Money is created in synergy with debt. If debt is paid off, the money disappears.

Opposing financial senses have argued that the power of the dollar will allow it to remain intact due to the strength of the nation that issues it – the United States of America. Typically, the largest economy would hold the dominating currency. It was only thirty years ago that the American GDP was twenty times as great as the current opposing superpower, China. To further support the opposing defense, the opposition claims that as China recedes from infrastructure and large-scale borrowing, the acceleration in the rate of growth would decrease, allowing the constancy of America as the world’s economic superpower.

However, the opposition has failed to detect error in American self-conduct. For years, the exalted position of America has shown signs of disturbance due to its significant financial debt and wilted economic recovery. In a sense, China has been dominating in the game of economic chess. Although the acceleration of China’s economy may be reducing, America’s economy is decelerating. A wrong move instigated by the large profit margin of flourishing co-operations who manufactured goods in low-paid laboring countries, namely China, have continued to increase in its dependence to the manufacturing country. With false prosperity, the ‘American Dream’ was purchased with borrowed money. 2017 has been dubbed as the year of the predicted dollar collapse – because there won’t be any dollar to pay off the debt. Checkmate.

The dollar collapse will affect every single person across the globe. As the De Facto world currency, it has taken control over almost every aspect of our lives: the food we eat, the jobs we work, the government, and even our personal relationships. Therefore, as tenacious as the radical relativist views may be, it is undeniable that money has always been, and will always be, the racehorse and horseman clasping the reins.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
D

Deleted member 20138

Guest
Hi ShavinPerera, the essay is pretty good for a first go, especially if you wrote it under timed conditions. You also put examples of current affairs to good use in your paragraphs as well. The only criticism I really have is a few spelling errors here and there which would wreak havoc in the criteria sheet when it comes to marking.Wishing you the best of luck on your GAMSAT this year :).
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jey

Lurker
Hey everyone,

This is an essay question I got from the first post Mana, deeply appreciate anyone willing to critique and give me any pointers on my essay.
Thank you in advance! :)

An artist should not be influenced by the public judgement of his or her work.


A beauty of an artist is in his or her ability to portray a deeper profound message, thereby public influences should’ not mar the way one chooses to convey this message to their audience. An artwork despite what medium it may use allows the human mind to project further than the limitations provided by reality, thereby forcing the audience to expand their minds past their own constraints. However, the public judgement often reflects the values of the dominant paradigm, thus if these judgements where to be taken in consideration by the artist, the final piece does’ not stand true to the his or her own reflections. Despite this, many artists often find themselves moulding to a scaffold society presents, to gain the public’s favour. However it is the artist’s with unorthodox masterpieces who refuse to conform that allows society to forever change and humanity to be continually dynamic. Thereby, one must never adapt to another but his own interpretation of what his work is to be.


An artist is able to explore a mirage of possibilities, beyond what reality has moulded, giving the audience insight into future possibilities of mankind. One such masterpiece being Thomas More’s Utopia, it depicts a fictional society that contrasted the governance of the European Reign More was residing in. In this literary artwork, he construes a debate surrounding ideologies such as socialism, communism and capitalism challenging the ideas of the dominant views as Richard McCarthy states, ‘Thomas More’s Utopia challenged the contemporary society, questioning those conventions which allowed a minority to dominate while the majority were subjugated.’ Similarly, Aldous Huxley’s ‘The Brave New World’, challenges the way society was heading as Huxley states, ‘The future is the present projected.’. However initial reception of his novel was shunned by society as H.G. Wells critiques, ‘A writer of the standing of Aldous Huxley has no right to betray the future as he did in that book,’. Albeit the initial chilly criticism both works were subjugated too, by opposing public judgment of the time both pieces have become staples in their timeless ideologies today giving the modern audience an opportunity to further and criticise the society we are a part off.


Similarly an artist is able to critique and explore mankind’s history, detailing the effect on society and how an event in history shift can cause a distinct paradigm shift. One such piece is the Australian drama film directed by Phillip Noyce, ‘The Rabbit Proof Fence,’ allows the audience to view ‘the racial ideology implemented by English Colonists in Western Australia.’ Martia Musial states and as former Liberal leader John Hewson further supports, ‘John Howard and his ministry should, as a matter of compulsion, take the first opportunity to see and discuss the movie Rabbit-Proof Fence. And…they should immediately say "Sorry!" along with, and on behalf of, the rest of us.’ Typically there would have been an era such topic’s weren’t discussed and debated upon, however Noyce was able to draw upon history break these barriers and teach and educate the audience. Thus confirming, that artists who indeed do not heed public opinion expressing their true artwork in turn allows their audience to take on a differing and more intuitive perspective.


Artist’s have the power to allow their mediums to be a carrier of ideas and thought, giving them power. As Kulane a critic states, ‘When Hitler came to power on January 30th 1933, he was acutely aware of the power of artists – both within Nazi Germany and internationally…Hitler knew that they had the power to undermine Germany abroad if they were allowed to write as they wished.’ leading the unlawful Book Burning in Nazi Germany where novels that expressed ideas not consistent with the Third Reich were burnt. In response to this act, Bertlolt Brecht states, ‘Where you burn books, you ultimately burn people.’ any form of artwork produced during the Third Reich was only allowed to do so in accordance to the dominant paradigm of the ruling party. This only reinforces the perception, that when artist is crippled in his ability to express his true thoughts it can ultimately lead to shift or standstill in society and it’s acts.


Ultimately, the motive of an artist to produce the work he or she chooses depends on a multitude of factors. However, each artist in their own right have an invaluable opportunity to carry an idea that in turn can affect their audience. Likewise, society is built upon idea’s of humanity that can either oppose or support the dominant paradigms, yet allows humanity to educate themselves from the past and better themselves in the future. Ultimately, this lies in one’s desire to express their opinion without the fear of public judgement or retribution.
 
Hi everyone, can someone please read over my essay on communication? Thanks :)

“Communication is two-sided – Vital and profound communication makes demands also on those who are to receive it. Demands in the sense of concentration, of genuine effort to receive what is being communicated” – Roger Sessions

“Television is a medium of entertainment which permits millions of people to listen to the same joke at the same time, and yet remain lonesome” – T.S Eliot

Communication, and the ability to communicate, has also been critical in our ability to interact with other members of the human race. Like most other members of the animal kingdom, humans are social creatures that require the safety and security in numbers not only for protection, but also for effective functioning of both the group and the individual. As civilisations progressed, as the human populations grew bigger in more places, and as technology improved, our need for social interaction has placed less emphasis on our basic need for survival, and more on our need to exchange ideas, derive entertainment, and thus develop meaningful relationships with various people in our lives. Even today we still crave deep connections with others, and yet with modern technology now, whether we are still able to achieve this is still debatable.

As Roger Sessions once said, “Communication is two-sided – Vital and profound communication makes demands also on those who are to receive it. Demands in the sense of concentration, of genuine effort to receive what is being communicated.” This implies that both the communicator and communicated need to be active participants of the conversation in order for different ideas to be properly communicated. Otherwise, the active participant would just be spoonfeeding the passive, accepting audience, and ideas, no matter how profound, would not be retained in the communicated’s head. The way two or more people ‘communicate’ is dependent on the medium they use for communication. Before the 21[SUP]st[/SUP] century, written communication took any time between a few days to a few months to arrive to the recipient, and even more for a reply. As a result, this allowed more time and less pressure for the reader to consider the letter, and thus reply accordingly. Fast forward about 100 years later, social media such as Facebook, Twitter and Skype allows almost real-time conversations, even ‘face-to-face’ ones that were, only a couple of years ago, could only be done in real life. As a result, these types of medial have great potential in helping us forge deeper, more fulfilling connections with more people.

Unfortunately, this does not appear to be the case. Whilst modern technology has enabled us to connect with more people, it has not been as successful in helping us form closer bonds with these ‘friends’. This is evident in the rise of ‘chatspeak’ where a ‘lol’, a ‘ttyl’ and a wink face undermine whatever serious conversation was taking place, if it was serious at all. Compared to the “sense of concentration, of genuine effort” Sessions spoke of, chatspeak seems lazy, shallow, and unintelligent. Not only does it also appear to be a bit inconsiderate to the communicator, but it also seems like a reflex, thoughtless response, a far cry from what communication should be, according to Sessions. Other forms of media, such as television, reinforce the illusion that we just need human company, not human connections, that we are mindlessly content in our self-imposed solitude. “Television is a medium of entertainment which permits millions of people to listen to the same joke at the same time, and yet remain lonesome,” as T.S Eliot once said. Thanks to television, families do not have to put so much effort into maintaining conversations with each other, and yet still be able to enjoy (or at least tolerate) each other’s company as they absorb another episode of ‘Keeping Up with the Kardashians’. TV has provided us with yet another distraction from forming meaningful relationships with others, and lulls us into a false sense of contentment that our natural, social tendencies will thrive in front of our TV screens by ourselves. Interestingly enough, some shows allow watchers to go on live and tweet about their opinions, and thus ‘connect’ with other viewers and ‘join in the conversation’. Yet rather than encourage actual meaningful discussions on said reality TV show, Twitter just functions simply as a platform for viewers to voice their thoughts, criticize (rarely critique) the participants, and up-vote other similar opinions. This is hardly the exchange of ideas and opinions between two active participants who are willing to discuss and impart profound ideas.

Social media has the great potential for us to communicate with more people across the globe, even more so than our predecessors. Yet close, fulfilling communications is more difficult today, with more emphasis on having 5,000 Facebook ‘friends’ rather than actually getting to know them. Because of this, some forms of social media are just not appropriate for starting and maintaining deep meaningful discussions with each other. After all, how do you have proper conversation using 140 characters or less?
 
Section 2 critique needed

Hi guys, I have written an essay and am in a desperate need of some remarks. It isnt very good but please give it some critique and an approximate mark.

Quote : In Republics, the great danger is that the majority may not sufficiently respect the rights of the minority.

My Right, My Choice

The majority of today's society is based on democracy. Laws and consents are established to run a systematic country or state, and also to protect their citizens from crimes and provide them with their rights and freedom of speech. Governments are elected on the basis of votes of the majority. Nevertheless, why aren’t the minority taken into account? “In Republics, the great danger is that the majority may not sufficiently respect the rights of the minority”, is a statement made by James Madison. Meaning, that in today’s society, where the government is elected on the basis of majority, poses threats to the rights of those who hold different opinions, the minority. Thus, we live in a world where ‘majority rules’.

Reinforcing the parable by Madison, the instance of the Russian government and its laws can be taken into consideration. Vladimir Putin is an anti-gay Prime Minister of Russia, a country where ***** attraction is illegal. The statement, “You can feel at home here in Sochi, but please leave the children”, made by him before the winter Olympics makes his anti-gay views evident. Russia is an anti-gay country where its citizens are inhumanely beaten, tortured, bullied and sometimes even murdered for the ‘crime’ of being *****. This is a part of life for all the *****. Unfortunately for them, their rights are not worth considering and the government will turn a blind eye in regards to all the assaults the gays go through. Vladimir Putin and the citizens of Russia provide clear and concrete evidence which strongly support James Madison’s statement.

Despite the truth in Madison’s statement, a counterargument can be formed where governments do actually consider the opinions and rights of the minority. The new health care system of the USA, the Affordable Care Act, is an act which requires employers to contribute for the health expenses of their employees, this includes the contraception mandate. However, the Catholic churches disagree with this mandate and refuse to pay any contribution that involves contraception for their employees. One of these churches took this matter into court, arguing that contraception is against their religion and belief and thus, will not take part in this mandate. Surprisingly, the judge announced his decision for the church, which frees the church from following the contraception mandate. The evidence becomes crystal clear that some government, like the American government, don’t only focus on the majority, but also consider the opinions and rights of the minority.

The dividing line becomes clear. James Madison made a concrete argument that the rights of the minority are never really taken into consideration. Of course, there are governments who respect the rights and opinions of the minority however, there are countless governments who belief that the rights and opinions of the minority are the least of their concern. In conclusion, we live in a world where majority rules.

 

Arophygon

Lurker
First attempt, not looking for sympathy, rip into me like you mean it! NOTE: all spelling and grammar mistakes are exactly how I wrote it down.

Common Theme: society

1: “We are all so guilty at the way we have allowed the world around us to become more ugly and tasteless every year that we surrender to terror and steep ourselves in it.”

Norman Mailer, In the Belly of the Beast: Letters From Prison

2: “We all do better when we work together. Our differences do matter, but our common humanity matters more.”

Bill Clinton

3: “The unhappiest people in this world, are those who care the most about what other people think.”

C. JoyBell C.

4: “The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class are to represent and repress them.”

Karl Marx

5: “To be wealthy and honored in an unjust society is a disgrace.”

Confucius, The Analects



An unjust society is best defined by the disproportion in weight of the scales of justice. On one side, the group of people, determined and hardworking, clean heartedly trying to raise children, add value to society and develop a peaceful environment. On the other, those that have tricked themselves into thinking that wealth derived from deception will lead to the ultimate happiness. In any point in time the group that weighs the heaviest on the scales of justice is the group that has allowed themselves to work together for their common humanity.

For the just, the ability to separate their differences for the benefit of common humanity enables a peaceful, beautiful environment. Throughout the history of Europe, savage terror in the form of war, bullying and deception has reigned as the dominant enforcer of civilized and uncivilized law. Niccolo Machiaveli’s idea that the largest force dominates humanity has been proven incorrect by the peaceful and loving emotion that emanated throughout Europe after the inhumanity of WWII. Diaries of those who suffered and the momentum of the despair felt after WWII united those who found warmth and relief in the nest of peace. By separating their difference, the European countries, that formed organizations such as NATO and the European union, have outweighed the terrorible and unjust on the scales of justice.

The unjust, disillusioned by the so called power they possess have been allowed to dominate to this very day. Terrorist organizations formed for no other purpose than to oppress have been allowed to engage in murderous rampages throughout the middle east, most notably in Syria. As time goes by, the emotions felt by our elders after WWII are decayed, leading to laziness in times where working together to defeat terror should be a primary goal. The lack of immediate action in Syria by the international society has allowed terror to dominate and become the heavier weight on the scales of justice.
 

Dinahlady

Regular Member
First attempt, not looking for sympathy, rip into me like you mean it! NOTE: all spelling and grammar mistakes are exactly how I wrote it down.
The content of what you have written seems good but the style it is written in is difficult to read.

Your sentences are really long and garbled. Heaps of passive voice and nominalisations. I seriously can't figure out if you were just pressing that middle button on the iphone repeadly or what. Ok I'll stop being so harsh now LOL. But yeah, some just aren't correct and most are hard to understand. I recommend reading the book "style, clarity, and grace." It teaches you how to form clear sentences and is pretty painless as far as a "textbook" goes.
 
Last edited:

Arophygon

Lurker
Your sentences are really long and garbled. Heaps of passive voice and nominalisations. I seriously can't figure out if you were just pressing that middle button on the iphone repeadly or what. To me it wasnt much easier to understand than the post that's directly below yours. Ok I'll stop being so harsh now LOL. But yeah, some just aren't correct and most are hard to understand. I recommend reading the book "style, clarity, and grace." It teaches you how to form clear sentences and is pretty painless as far as a "textbook" goes.

Thank you for the feedback and recommendation. As you can tell, I haven't had any recent practice in writing communication and have produced a terrible report. But I'm starting somewhere. If you have any other recommendations, specifically textbooks, please send them through because I will read them.
 

Dinahlady

Regular Member
Thank you for the feedback and recommendation. As you can tell, I haven't had any recent practice in writing communication and have produced a terrible report. But I'm starting somewhere. If you have any other recommendations, specifically textbooks, please send them through because I will read them.

My best advice is to keep your sentences as simple as possible. It sounds counterintuitive because you might think being all fancy is the best way, but being simple and CLEAR will definitely get you more marks.

The book is this one. Its small, nice to read, and guides you through easy examples/exercises.

http://www.amazon.com/Style-Lessons..._UL160_SR103,160_&refRID=0R25Z6VER1Q7P2WP1ZK7
 

ways

Member
Oops, my comment was to Mana for starting this and others for taking it up and helping it along. thanks
 
Hi Mana,

Just wondering if you could comment on whether or not there is a general structure which should be used for essays all the time?
 
Top