- Joined
- May 10, 2006
- Messages
- 704
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
- Medical Student
Ok, so bad grammer can really ruin a piece of writing. Anyone know how much this stuff counts in the writing samples?
Spelling and Grammer
- Thread starter Kikaku21
- Start date
Kikaku21 said:
Haha ok not to be a jerk....
but given your topic...
Lol it's grammar, not grammer
and as for the writing sample I think they overlook minor/normal mistakes as they know you're not given an excessive amount of time to write the essay let alone proofread it...
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2006
- Messages
- 1,181
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
- Medical Student
i feel like it can affect your writing sample score a lot...as can choice of words, quality of examples, and how well your essay flows. i dont know, the writing sample grading seems so random to me. you'll see people (myself included) who have always received top grades on papers getting low writing sample scores.Kikaku21 said:
- Joined
- May 10, 2006
- Messages
- 704
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
- Medical Student
Erina said:
Yeah.. We'll see. I can write a really good essay, with well placed words and a structured thought process. The only problem is that my spelling can be a little weak sometimes. 👎
- Joined
- May 10, 2006
- Messages
- 704
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
- Medical Student
MJB said:
NO JOKE.
I just read the one for AAMC 8. "In a democracy, the successful politician resembles the ordinary citizen."
What does this quote mean to you?
IT MEANS EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS, THATS WHAT!!!
Seriously. Ugh.
- Joined
- May 10, 2006
- Messages
- 704
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
- Medical Student
What I actually wrote was.....
The statement represents a topic of importance to democratic nations, and has long been a topic of considerable debate. There are many implications to be considered in defining a democracy, and one of the most important is whether or not a politician will represent the will of those who elect him. Since the first democracies, there have been advocates of the argument that the best politician is the ordinary citizen because he/she is most familiar with, and can best represent, the will of the people, which is the object of a democracy. The idea that the most successful politician (whether measured by amount of agenda completed or total time in office) is an ordinary man logically follows in this line of reasoning.... BLAH BLAH
I go on to talk about the counter examples, etc.
The statement represents a topic of importance to democratic nations, and has long been a topic of considerable debate. There are many implications to be considered in defining a democracy, and one of the most important is whether or not a politician will represent the will of those who elect him. Since the first democracies, there have been advocates of the argument that the best politician is the ordinary citizen because he/she is most familiar with, and can best represent, the will of the people, which is the object of a democracy. The idea that the most successful politician (whether measured by amount of agenda completed or total time in office) is an ordinary man logically follows in this line of reasoning.... BLAH BLAH
I go on to talk about the counter examples, etc.
Kikaku21 said:
Mr. Clinton... his everyday faults, MTV appearances.... so on...
Eisenhower.... Very militaristic and unlike the normal citizen but that made him successful throughout the Korean war and ultimately a successful leader...
Times normal = everyday person, does it best
Specialized circumstances = specialized leader
