# data[].field_overview.value
Test Content with Tags and more content

# data[].field_overview.processed
Test Content with Tags and more content

# data[].field_overview.value
Overview Item 2.

# data[].field_overview.processed
Overview Item 2.

# data[].field_overview.value
You don’t have any practice test scores. Please download Bluebook, complete a full-length digital SAT Suite practice test, and submit your results.

# data[].field_overview.processed
You don’t have any practice test scores. Please download Bluebook, complete a full-length digital SAT Suite practice test, and submit your results.

# data[].field_external_description
Use Khan Academy's customized resources to review practice questions you missed and improve your confidence when you retake an SAT practice test.

# data[].field_external_description
Want to show colleges you're ready? Sign up now to take the SAT.

# data[].field_overview.value
SAT Practice Tests

# data[].field_overview.processed
SAT Practice Tests

# data[].field_overview.value
Overview content should still appear even if Body fields are used.

# data[].field_overview.processed
Overview content should still appear even if Body fields are used.

# data[].field_overview.value
PSAT-Related Practice Tests

# data[].field_overview.processed
PSAT-Related Practice Tests

# data[].field_overview.value
My PSAT 8/9 Practice Tests

# data[].field_overview.processed
My PSAT 8/9 Practice Tests

# data[].field_overview.value
Before your test date, please make sure to carefully review the PSAT/NMSQT Guide and Testing Rules set forth
at the end of the Guide (

https://satsuite.collegeboard.org/psat-nmsqt/terms-conditions

). It is important to read carefully through these Rules now as you will be required to agree to them prior to
starting your exam on test day.

# data[].field_overview.processed
Before your test date, please make sure to carefully review the PSAT/NMSQT Guide and Testing Rules set forth
at the end of the Guide (

https://satsuite.collegeboard.org/psat-nmsqt/terms-conditions

). It is important to read carefully through these Rules now as you will be required to agree to them prior to
starting your exam on test day.

# data[].field_overview.value
Use a sign-in ticket from your school

# data[].field_overview.processed
Use a sign-in ticket from your school

# data[].field_overview.value
Need help signing in?

# data[].field_overview.processed
Need help signing in?

# data[].field_overview.value
Sign in with a student College Board account

# data[].field_overview.processed
Sign in with a student College Board account

# data[].field_overview.value
If you forgot your user ID and registration number, please contact your school.

# data[].field_overview.processed
If you forgot your user ID and registration number, please contact your school.

# data[].field_external_description
You have logged in with temporary access credentials. To maintain access to these scores, you should set up a College Board account before your temporary credentials expire. If you'd like to create an account, click here.

# data[].field_external_description
Choose your own practice questions to help improve your test score.

# data[].field_overview.value
Paul Bogard’s essay about the necessity of darkness captures the reader’s attention. He brilliantly gave examples of why darkness is essential and how darkness can benefit human life. His use of syntax also supports his essay to have very reasonable and valid points.

Bogard starts out by giving one example from his own personal experience at his family’s cabin on a Minnesota lake. He describes the Milky Way and the night sky in all of it’s brilliance. He then portrays how 8 out of 10 children born in the United States will never know a sky darky enough for the Milky Way. By this point, Bogard is building up pathos within his essay. The reader begins to feel pity for those 8 in 10 children who will never get the chance to see the sky in its truest and most real form. Bogard then explains how much turning a light switch on and off is taken for granted. This is an example of logos because the reader can sense that that is what life has come down to. It is evident that the world today is dependent upon electricity, and Bogard does a fabulous job gathering evidence for this argument that darkness has been undermined.

Some other examples that Bogard gives are the issues of light pollution and nocturnal animals. He explains that our bodies need darkness to produce certain hormones which can prevent certain diseases and illnesses. Also, he claims how animals are dependent upon the darkness and without darkness, “Earth’s ecology would collapse.” Then he goes on to talk about the previous centuries and how they did not rely on electricity to live their everyday lives.

One of the most famous paintings in history was done centuries ago and was called “Starry Night,” by Vincent Van Gogh. Bogard explains how the night sky can be inspiring which causes more pathos to build up within the reader, causing them to think about the importance of the darkness and beauty of nighttime.

After giving examples of how darkness is taken for granted, Bogard provides a solution. This is logos. He tells the reader that the over usage of light and electricity doesn’t have to be that way and by making a few minor changes, the world can be different. Giving examples of everyday life and providing a solution, Bogard brilliantly portrayed the need and importance of darkness in everyday life.

# data[].field_overview.processed
Paul Bogard’s essay about the necessity of darkness captures the reader’s attention. He brilliantly gave examples of why darkness is essential and how darkness can benefit human life. His use of syntax also supports his essay to have very reasonable and valid points.

Bogard starts out by giving one example from his own personal experience at his family’s cabin on a Minnesota lake. He describes the Milky Way and the night sky in all of it’s brilliance. He then portrays how 8 out of 10 children born in the United States will never know a sky darky enough for the Milky Way. By this point, Bogard is building up pathos within his essay. The reader begins to feel pity for those 8 in 10 children who will never get the chance to see the sky in its truest and most real form. Bogard then explains how much turning a light switch on and off is taken for granted. This is an example of logos because the reader can sense that that is what life has come down to. It is evident that the world today is dependent upon electricity, and Bogard does a fabulous job gathering evidence for this argument that darkness has been undermined.

Some other examples that Bogard gives are the issues of light pollution and nocturnal animals. He explains that our bodies need darkness to produce certain hormones which can prevent certain diseases and illnesses. Also, he claims how animals are dependent upon the darkness and without darkness, “Earth’s ecology would collapse.” Then he goes on to talk about the previous centuries and how they did not rely on electricity to live their everyday lives.

One of the most famous paintings in history was done centuries ago and was called “Starry Night,” by Vincent Van Gogh. Bogard explains how the night sky can be inspiring which causes more pathos to build up within the reader, causing them to think about the importance of the darkness and beauty of nighttime.

After giving examples of how darkness is taken for granted, Bogard provides a solution. This is logos. He tells the reader that the over usage of light and electricity doesn’t have to be that way and by making a few minor changes, the world can be different. Giving examples of everyday life and providing a solution, Bogard brilliantly portrayed the need and importance of darkness in everyday life.

# data[].field_overview.value
Paul Bogard, author of “Let There be Dark” has structurely emphasized why darkness is beneficial, and he also recognizes some individuals who are depleting our darkness. Whether an individual loves being baked by the sun, or loves the cool night breeze, dark will always accompany us in our world.

Bogard points out the people who take “[their] tablets, notebooks and smartphones to bed,” because he knows that our world is technologically advanced and a majority of people use it 24/7. As a reader, one may feel guilty after reading this paragraph because they know that they are an individual who brings technology to bed. Bogard knows that this will interest readers because it applies to their daily life. One may argue that taking a tablet to bed doesn’t get rid of darkness, it only enlightens them on the latest gossip. This is one example of how were letting technology and social media run our lives. Bogard clearly embedded this fact into his story because he knows that it will affect a lot of Americans.

Most people wouldn’t consider lighting up a dark room as light pollution, but Bogard gives this activity a name. Bogard mentions tourist attractions, Europe and Paris, to persuade readers to quit the emission of light. Even though Paris is “the [famous] city of lights,” they are willing to turn off the monument lights, shop & offices lighting, and also public building lights in order to combat light pollution. The reductions in lighting will not only save energy, but also help with the light pollution problem; turning off lights can be beneficial in many different ways. Bogard uses famous places to prove that this is a world- wide issue.

Bogard uses emotional appeal when he mentions the different types of species that benefit from darkness. Most people are more sensitive towards animals, rather than just plain facts and figures. Bogard uses the fourth paragraph to describe how animals and farmers will be affected by light pollution. The species on our planet are our responsibility because they have nobody to tell us what is right or wrong for them. Bogard makes it obvious that light pollution is not only affecting our citizens, but our animals.

Bogard also uses emotion to persuade the reader when he asks, “Who knows what this vision of the night sky might inspire in each of us?” This could be emotional for some people or parents because Bogard is mainly stating that without the night sky, many of us would not have some advanced thoughts. Everybody is this world wants to succeed at something, and this question may make people think about how light pollution can affect their future. Bogard’s stylistic approach to hook the reader in was achieved at this point. Not all people may care how light pollution may affect the animals around us, but most people care about themselves and their loved ones around them.

Bogard also explains how “darkness [produces] the hormone melatonin.” Many people may be shocked by this because they realize that light pollution and bringing tablets to bed is something that will affect their health. Melatonin is key to everyone’s healthy sleep habits. This part incorporates reasoning and emotion. Without the darkness that is created naturally, none of us would be able to sleep, resulting in sleep disorders.

With the use of emotion, and facts, Bogard has completely involved the reader in an issue that they may not think is apparent.

# data[].field_overview.processed
Paul Bogard, author of “Let There be Dark” has structurely emphasized why darkness is beneficial, and he also recognizes some individuals who are depleting our darkness. Whether an individual loves being baked by the sun, or loves the cool night breeze, dark will always accompany us in our world.

Bogard points out the people who take “[their] tablets, notebooks and smartphones to bed,” because he knows that our world is technologically advanced and a majority of people use it 24/7. As a reader, one may feel guilty after reading this paragraph because they know that they are an individual who brings technology to bed. Bogard knows that this will interest readers because it applies to their daily life. One may argue that taking a tablet to bed doesn’t get rid of darkness, it only enlightens them on the latest gossip. This is one example of how were letting technology and social media run our lives. Bogard clearly embedded this fact into his story because he knows that it will affect a lot of Americans.

Most people wouldn’t consider lighting up a dark room as light pollution, but Bogard gives this activity a name. Bogard mentions tourist attractions, Europe and Paris, to persuade readers to quit the emission of light. Even though Paris is “the [famous] city of lights,” they are willing to turn off the monument lights, shop & offices lighting, and also public building lights in order to combat light pollution. The reductions in lighting will not only save energy, but also help with the light pollution problem; turning off lights can be beneficial in many different ways. Bogard uses famous places to prove that this is a world- wide issue.

Bogard uses emotional appeal when he mentions the different types of species that benefit from darkness. Most people are more sensitive towards animals, rather than just plain facts and figures. Bogard uses the fourth paragraph to describe how animals and farmers will be affected by light pollution. The species on our planet are our responsibility because they have nobody to tell us what is right or wrong for them. Bogard makes it obvious that light pollution is not only affecting our citizens, but our animals.

Bogard also uses emotion to persuade the reader when he asks, “Who knows what this vision of the night sky might inspire in each of us?” This could be emotional for some people or parents because Bogard is mainly stating that without the night sky, many of us would not have some advanced thoughts. Everybody is this world wants to succeed at something, and this question may make people think about how light pollution can affect their future. Bogard’s stylistic approach to hook the reader in was achieved at this point. Not all people may care how light pollution may affect the animals around us, but most people care about themselves and their loved ones around them.

Bogard also explains how “darkness [produces] the hormone melatonin.” Many people may be shocked by this because they realize that light pollution and bringing tablets to bed is something that will affect their health. Melatonin is key to everyone’s healthy sleep habits. This part incorporates reasoning and emotion. Without the darkness that is created naturally, none of us would be able to sleep, resulting in sleep disorders.

With the use of emotion, and facts, Bogard has completely involved the reader in an issue that they may not think is apparent.

# data[].field_overview.value
Paul Bogard, a respected and passionate writer, offers a convincing argument on the importance of allowing more darkness to fill the earth for distinct health and ecological reasons. With light providing as such a huge factor in daily life, we sometimes forget that darkness can have more healing abilities, and allows nature to return to a nonartificial, primitive state. Bogard uses personal observation for credibility, stirring feelings, and startling facts to deliver a powerful argument.

Throughout the passage, Bogard remains nostalgic about his childhood: “At my family’s cabin on a Minnesota lake, I knew woods so dark that my hands disappeared before my eyes. I knew night skies in which meteors left smoky trails across sugary spreads of stars....This winter solstice, as we cheer the days’ gradual movement back toward light, let us also remember the irreplaceable value of darkness.” The description of nature and the stunningly beautiful imagery creates a feeling of deep respect for the darkness. We share in Bogard’s view and as a result, Bogard has undeniable credibility. Bogard knows the power of darkness and through his childhood memories, we lean our ears to listen to him.

Even though credibility makes many appearences throughout the passage, it would have no real meaning without evoking emotion. Bogard strikes the people who disagree with him when he says, “Our bodies need darkness to produce the hormone melatonin, which keeps certain cancers from developing and our bodies need darkness for sleep. Sleep disorders have been linked to diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular disease and depression, and recent research suggests one main cause of ‘short sleep’ is ‘long light’.” Bogard’s statement dissolves any doubt, but builds up new feeling. We finally see the true importance of allowing our world to temporarily succumb to darkness. Through the emotion Bogard evokes, we suddenly feel defensive in preserving the darkness for the sake of our mental and physical health. Bogard even makes us think about the future generations: “In a world awash with electric light...how would Van Gogh have given the world his ‘starry night’? Who knows what this vision of the night sky must inspire in each of us, in our children or grandchildren?”

In order to achieve proper credibility and stir emotion, undeniable facts must reside in passage. Bogard has completed his research, and uses it to further his case: “The rest of the world depends on darkness as well, including nocturnal and crepuscular species of birds, insects, mammals, fish, and reptiles. Some examples are well known—the 400 species of birds that migrate at night in North America, the sea turtles that come to lay their eggs—and some are not, such as the bats that save American farmers billions in pest control and the moths that pollinate 80% of the world’s flora.” Using the facts about animals, Bogard extends the argument beyond humans, allowing us to see that darkness does not only have an impact on us, but all of nature. Bogard then says, “In the United States and Western Europe, the amount of light in the sky increases an average of about 6% every year.... Much of this light is wasted energy, which means wasted dollars. Those of us over 35 are perhaps among the last generation to have known truly dark nights.” However, Bogard extends the facts to offer various solutions to wasted and excessive light, such as changing LED streetlights and reducing the use of lights in public buildings and homes during the night. Bogard builds up our world, and then breaks it down in our minds with his writing: “Simply put, without darkness, Earth’s ecology would collapse....”

We can still save our world according to Bogard. We must see the strength and beauty in the darkness, and remember how our world survived without lights. Light can be acceptable, but too much of it can prove worse than permanent darkness.

# data[].field_overview.processed
Paul Bogard, a respected and passionate writer, offers a convincing argument on the importance of allowing more darkness to fill the earth for distinct health and ecological reasons. With light providing as such a huge factor in daily life, we sometimes forget that darkness can have more healing abilities, and allows nature to return to a nonartificial, primitive state. Bogard uses personal observation for credibility, stirring feelings, and startling facts to deliver a powerful argument.

Throughout the passage, Bogard remains nostalgic about his childhood: “At my family’s cabin on a Minnesota lake, I knew woods so dark that my hands disappeared before my eyes. I knew night skies in which meteors left smoky trails across sugary spreads of stars....This winter solstice, as we cheer the days’ gradual movement back toward light, let us also remember the irreplaceable value of darkness.” The description of nature and the stunningly beautiful imagery creates a feeling of deep respect for the darkness. We share in Bogard’s view and as a result, Bogard has undeniable credibility. Bogard knows the power of darkness and through his childhood memories, we lean our ears to listen to him.

Even though credibility makes many appearences throughout the passage, it would have no real meaning without evoking emotion. Bogard strikes the people who disagree with him when he says, “Our bodies need darkness to produce the hormone melatonin, which keeps certain cancers from developing and our bodies need darkness for sleep. Sleep disorders have been linked to diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular disease and depression, and recent research suggests one main cause of ‘short sleep’ is ‘long light’.” Bogard’s statement dissolves any doubt, but builds up new feeling. We finally see the true importance of allowing our world to temporarily succumb to darkness. Through the emotion Bogard evokes, we suddenly feel defensive in preserving the darkness for the sake of our mental and physical health. Bogard even makes us think about the future generations: “In a world awash with electric light...how would Van Gogh have given the world his ‘starry night’? Who knows what this vision of the night sky must inspire in each of us, in our children or grandchildren?”

In order to achieve proper credibility and stir emotion, undeniable facts must reside in passage. Bogard has completed his research, and uses it to further his case: “The rest of the world depends on darkness as well, including nocturnal and crepuscular species of birds, insects, mammals, fish, and reptiles. Some examples are well known—the 400 species of birds that migrate at night in North America, the sea turtles that come to lay their eggs—and some are not, such as the bats that save American farmers billions in pest control and the moths that pollinate 80% of the world’s flora.” Using the facts about animals, Bogard extends the argument beyond humans, allowing us to see that darkness does not only have an impact on us, but all of nature. Bogard then says, “In the United States and Western Europe, the amount of light in the sky increases an average of about 6% every year.... Much of this light is wasted energy, which means wasted dollars. Those of us over 35 are perhaps among the last generation to have known truly dark nights.” However, Bogard extends the facts to offer various solutions to wasted and excessive light, such as changing LED streetlights and reducing the use of lights in public buildings and homes during the night. Bogard builds up our world, and then breaks it down in our minds with his writing: “Simply put, without darkness, Earth’s ecology would collapse....”

We can still save our world according to Bogard. We must see the strength and beauty in the darkness, and remember how our world survived without lights. Light can be acceptable, but too much of it can prove worse than permanent darkness.

# data[].field_overview.value
In response to our world’s growing reliance on artificial light, writer Paul Bogard argues that natural darkness should be preserved in his article “Let There be dark”. He effectively builds his argument by using a personal anecdote, allusions to art and history, and rhetorical questions.

Bogard starts his article off by recounting a personal story – a summer spent on a Minnesota lake where there was “woods so dark that [his] hands disappeared before [his] eyes.” In telling this brief anecdote, Bogard challenges the audience to remember a time where they could fully amass themselves in natural darkness void of artificial light. By drawing in his readers with a personal encounter about night darkness, the author means to establish the potential for beauty, glamour, and awe-inspiring mystery that genuine darkness can possess. He builds his argument for the preservation of natural darkness by reminiscing for his readers a first-hand encounter that proves the “irreplaceable value of darkness.” This anecdote provides a baseline of sorts for readers to find credence with the author’s claims.

Bogard’s argument is also furthered by his use of allusion to art – Van Gogh’s “Starry Night” – and modern history – Paris’ reputation as “The City of Light”. By first referencing “Starry Night”, a painting generally considered to be undoubtedly beautiful, Bogard establishes that the natural magnificence of stars in a dark sky is definite. A world absent of excess artificial light could potentially hold the key to a grand, glorious night sky like Van Gogh’s according to the writer. This urges the readers to weigh the disadvantages of our world consumed by unnatural, vapid lighting. Furthermore, Bogard’s alludes to Paris as “the famed ‘city of light’”. He then goes on to state how Paris has taken steps to exercise more sustainable lighting practices. By doing this, Bogard creates a dichotomy between Paris’ traditionally alluded-to name and the reality of what Paris is becoming – no longer “the city of light”, but moreso “the city of light...before 2 AM”. This furthers his line of argumentation because it shows how steps can be and are being taken to preserve natural darkness. It shows that even a city that is literally famous for being constantly lit can practically address light pollution in a manner that preserves the beauty of both the city itself and the universe as a whole.

Finally, Bogard makes subtle yet efficient use of rhetorical questioning to persuade his audience that natural darkness preservation is essential. He asks the readers to consider “what the vision of the night sky might inspire in each of us, in our children or grandchildren?” in a way that brutally plays to each of our emotions. By asking this question, Bogard draws out heartfelt ponderance from his readers about the affecting power of an untainted night sky. This rhetorical question tugs at the readers’ heartstrings; while the reader may have seen an unobscured night skyline before, the possibility that their child or grandchild will never get the chance sways them to see as Bogard sees. This strategy is definitively an appeal to pathos, forcing the audience to directly face an emotionally-charged inquiry that will surely spur some kind of response. By doing this, Bogard develops his argument, adding gutthral power to the idea that the issue of maintaining natural darkness is relevant and multifaceted.

Writing as a reaction to his disappointment that artificial light has largely permeated the prescence of natural darkness, Paul Bogard argues that we must preserve true, unaffected darkness. He builds this claim by making use of a personal anecdote, allusions, and rhetorical questioning.

# data[].field_overview.processed
In response to our world’s growing reliance on artificial light, writer Paul Bogard argues that natural darkness should be preserved in his article “Let There be dark”. He effectively builds his argument by using a personal anecdote, allusions to art and history, and rhetorical questions.

Bogard starts his article off by recounting a personal story – a summer spent on a Minnesota lake where there was “woods so dark that [his] hands disappeared before [his] eyes.” In telling this brief anecdote, Bogard challenges the audience to remember a time where they could fully amass themselves in natural darkness void of artificial light. By drawing in his readers with a personal encounter about night darkness, the author means to establish the potential for beauty, glamour, and awe-inspiring mystery that genuine darkness can possess. He builds his argument for the preservation of natural darkness by reminiscing for his readers a first-hand encounter that proves the “irreplaceable value of darkness.” This anecdote provides a baseline of sorts for readers to find credence with the author’s claims.

Bogard’s argument is also furthered by his use of allusion to art – Van Gogh’s “Starry Night” – and modern history – Paris’ reputation as “The City of Light”. By first referencing “Starry Night”, a painting generally considered to be undoubtedly beautiful, Bogard establishes that the natural magnificence of stars in a dark sky is definite. A world absent of excess artificial light could potentially hold the key to a grand, glorious night sky like Van Gogh’s according to the writer. This urges the readers to weigh the disadvantages of our world consumed by unnatural, vapid lighting. Furthermore, Bogard’s alludes to Paris as “the famed ‘city of light’”. He then goes on to state how Paris has taken steps to exercise more sustainable lighting practices. By doing this, Bogard creates a dichotomy between Paris’ traditionally alluded-to name and the reality of what Paris is becoming – no longer “the city of light”, but moreso “the city of light...before 2 AM”. This furthers his line of argumentation because it shows how steps can be and are being taken to preserve natural darkness. It shows that even a city that is literally famous for being constantly lit can practically address light pollution in a manner that preserves the beauty of both the city itself and the universe as a whole.

Finally, Bogard makes subtle yet efficient use of rhetorical questioning to persuade his audience that natural darkness preservation is essential. He asks the readers to consider “what the vision of the night sky might inspire in each of us, in our children or grandchildren?” in a way that brutally plays to each of our emotions. By asking this question, Bogard draws out heartfelt ponderance from his readers about the affecting power of an untainted night sky. This rhetorical question tugs at the readers’ heartstrings; while the reader may have seen an unobscured night skyline before, the possibility that their child or grandchild will never get the chance sways them to see as Bogard sees. This strategy is definitively an appeal to pathos, forcing the audience to directly face an emotionally-charged inquiry that will surely spur some kind of response. By doing this, Bogard develops his argument, adding gutthral power to the idea that the issue of maintaining natural darkness is relevant and multifaceted.

Writing as a reaction to his disappointment that artificial light has largely permeated the prescence of natural darkness, Paul Bogard argues that we must preserve true, unaffected darkness. He builds this claim by making use of a personal anecdote, allusions, and rhetorical questioning.

# data[].field_overview.value
Dana Gioia builds an argument designed and commissioned by the National Endowment for the Arts. Americans declined for eight of the nine major forms that are measured. College attendance ballooned, and access to information increased enormously.

Some of the younger kids showed in the arts and espically literature actually diminished. The significane of reading has become a persistent theme in the business world. The magazine issue of Wired, for example, sketches a new set of mental skill and habits proper to the 21st century, aptitudes deadely literally in character: not “linear, logical, and analytical talents.”

Reading is not timeless universal capability.

# data[].field_overview.processed
Dana Gioia builds an argument designed and commissioned by the National Endowment for the Arts. Americans declined for eight of the nine major forms that are measured. College attendance ballooned, and access to information increased enormously.

Some of the younger kids showed in the arts and espically literature actually diminished. The significane of reading has become a persistent theme in the business world. The magazine issue of Wired, for example, sketches a new set of mental skill and habits proper to the 21st century, aptitudes deadely literally in character: not “linear, logical, and analytical talents.”

Reading is not timeless universal capability.

# data[].field_overview.value
Dana Gioia has a very strong belief that the decline of reading in America amoung teenagers will significantly have a negative affect on society. Ever since economical issues have arose like the attendance for college, incomes and access to information, Gioia states that the interest in young Americans for art and literature has actually diminish.

Gioia builds an arguement by including many studies and their outcomes to persuade his audience that the decline of reading has become an issue within society. For example, Gioia references the 2001 study from the National Association of Manufactures. The study states that the company tested their employees on skill deficiencies and the outcomes were very shocking. Poor reading skills ranked second and 38 percent of employees declared that schools taught reading comprehension inefficiently.

Dana Gioia’s arguement clearly states that the decreased interest in reading will have a negative effect because if workers cannot adequately work.

# data[].field_overview.processed
Dana Gioia has a very strong belief that the decline of reading in America amoung teenagers will significantly have a negative affect on society. Ever since economical issues have arose like the attendance for college, incomes and access to information, Gioia states that the interest in young Americans for art and literature has actually diminish.

Gioia builds an arguement by including many studies and their outcomes to persuade his audience that the decline of reading has become an issue within society. For example, Gioia references the 2001 study from the National Association of Manufactures. The study states that the company tested their employees on skill deficiencies and the outcomes were very shocking. Poor reading skills ranked second and 38 percent of employees declared that schools taught reading comprehension inefficiently.

Dana Gioia’s arguement clearly states that the decreased interest in reading will have a negative effect because if workers cannot adequately work.

# data[].field_overview.value
Dana Gioia’s “Why Literature Matters” (2005) argues that arts participation by Americans has declined severly and that it will negatively affect society. His strategies are evidence to support claims and an intellectual diction. His purpose is to get leaders such as politicians to aid in bringing back literature into America.

In the second paragraph of Gioia’s essay he includes results of a 2002 Survey of Public Participation in the Arts. This is one of his several examples of evidence which support his claim. Gioia states the report concluded that, “The declines have been most severe among young adults (18-24),” which gives him credibility to say that it will affect society negatively because the young and new generation isn’t involved in the arts as much.

Throughout Gioia’s essay he writes with a formal and intellectual diction. This boosts his credebility once again by making him seem very well educated and that may convince the reader that he really knows what he is talking about. Words in his fourth paragraph such as, “longstanding”, “fundamental” , and “contemporary,” are part of his educated word choice.

Gioa’s claim is very well backed by his evidence from several studies and the fact that he seems to be a well educated man. His arguement that the decline of reading in America will have a negative affect on society is strongly persuasive.

# data[].field_overview.processed
Dana Gioia’s “Why Literature Matters” (2005) argues that arts participation by Americans has declined severly and that it will negatively affect society. His strategies are evidence to support claims and an intellectual diction. His purpose is to get leaders such as politicians to aid in bringing back literature into America.

In the second paragraph of Gioia’s essay he includes results of a 2002 Survey of Public Participation in the Arts. This is one of his several examples of evidence which support his claim. Gioia states the report concluded that, “The declines have been most severe among young adults (18-24),” which gives him credibility to say that it will affect society negatively because the young and new generation isn’t involved in the arts as much.

Throughout Gioia’s essay he writes with a formal and intellectual diction. This boosts his credebility once again by making him seem very well educated and that may convince the reader that he really knows what he is talking about. Words in his fourth paragraph such as, “longstanding”, “fundamental” , and “contemporary,” are part of his educated word choice.

Gioa’s claim is very well backed by his evidence from several studies and the fact that he seems to be a well educated man. His arguement that the decline of reading in America will have a negative affect on society is strongly persuasive.

# data[].field_overview.value
Literature is one of the most important knowledge that any human can develop and gain. Throughout history, literature has helped many people grow and become strong and bright. Some literature may be inspiring to people, while it might be boring and useless to others. Dana Gioia wrote and published an article “Why Literature Matters” in the New York Times, 2005. In the passage, Dana talks about how literature diminished. Most of the young adult between 18-24 is the source of the decline. Many people do not admire literature anymore, it is considered a troubling trend Dana states. Also book reading is also declining.

During the passage, Dana uses actual surveys to support her opinion on the decline of literature. In the 2002 survey of Public Participation in the Arts, conveys how the arts participation has declined. The most terrifying information is that reading literature is declining mostly by young adults. Some may think that the reason reading by young adults are declining is because of the technology and social media today. The young adults are mostly influence and involved in the internet, telephones, activities and also social interaction to have nay time for reading. The people who do not read are also in danger of suffering the consequences that go beyond literature.

Reading is not only good for you, but it effects the influence that you have in your future job. In the February issue of Wired magazine displays the mental skills and habbits that reading can do to people. Author Daniel Pinks states “the ability to create artistic and emotional beauty, to detect patterns and opportunities, to craft a satisfying narrative.” Basically what he is saying is that reading does not only give you knowledge but it opens up your mind and gives you a greater inspiration and imagination. These talents and skills are great for the buisness and management world. Buisness leaders must have imagination and creativity to be different from the rest and in order to make their way to the top.

A 2003 study of 15-16 year olds concluded that “Young people do not understand the ideals of citizenship, and their appreiciation and support of American democracy is limited.” Without reading, people will not know historical and political information that readers know. “Reading A Risk” the issue from Arts Endowment conveys that people who read are more civically engaged then non readers. Readers scored two to four times more likely to perform charity work, visit a museum or attend a sporting event. Literary reading can provide the historical and civic knowledge that people need. The decline of literary reading may have a long term social and economic problem. This is because they do not have the knowledge to pursue the job they want and may not have the social mobility to converse with the people they need to.

Reading does not require much skill, you have to be inspired to do it. As Dana states, “Advanced literacy is a specific intellectual skill and social habbit that depends on a great many educational, cultural, and economic factors.” In the future, the more declines we have in reading may effect the knowledge of the people which can cause our nation to be less informed, active and independent minded.

# data[].field_overview.processed
Literature is one of the most important knowledge that any human can develop and gain. Throughout history, literature has helped many people grow and become strong and bright. Some literature may be inspiring to people, while it might be boring and useless to others. Dana Gioia wrote and published an article “Why Literature Matters” in the New York Times, 2005. In the passage, Dana talks about how literature diminished. Most of the young adult between 18-24 is the source of the decline. Many people do not admire literature anymore, it is considered a troubling trend Dana states. Also book reading is also declining.

During the passage, Dana uses actual surveys to support her opinion on the decline of literature. In the 2002 survey of Public Participation in the Arts, conveys how the arts participation has declined. The most terrifying information is that reading literature is declining mostly by young adults. Some may think that the reason reading by young adults are declining is because of the technology and social media today. The young adults are mostly influence and involved in the internet, telephones, activities and also social interaction to have nay time for reading. The people who do not read are also in danger of suffering the consequences that go beyond literature.

Reading is not only good for you, but it effects the influence that you have in your future job. In the February issue of Wired magazine displays the mental skills and habbits that reading can do to people. Author Daniel Pinks states “the ability to create artistic and emotional beauty, to detect patterns and opportunities, to craft a satisfying narrative.” Basically what he is saying is that reading does not only give you knowledge but it opens up your mind and gives you a greater inspiration and imagination. These talents and skills are great for the buisness and management world. Buisness leaders must have imagination and creativity to be different from the rest and in order to make their way to the top.

A 2003 study of 15-16 year olds concluded that “Young people do not understand the ideals of citizenship, and their appreiciation and support of American democracy is limited.” Without reading, people will not know historical and political information that readers know. “Reading A Risk” the issue from Arts Endowment conveys that people who read are more civically engaged then non readers. Readers scored two to four times more likely to perform charity work, visit a museum or attend a sporting event. Literary reading can provide the historical and civic knowledge that people need. The decline of literary reading may have a long term social and economic problem. This is because they do not have the knowledge to pursue the job they want and may not have the social mobility to converse with the people they need to.

Reading does not require much skill, you have to be inspired to do it. As Dana states, “Advanced literacy is a specific intellectual skill and social habbit that depends on a great many educational, cultural, and economic factors.” In the future, the more declines we have in reading may effect the knowledge of the people which can cause our nation to be less informed, active and independent minded.

# data[].field_overview.value
In the article “Why literature matters” (2005) Dana Gioia expresses that American arts have changed and that many people are beginning to no longer read. He argues that intellectual abilities are decreacing. Gioia expresses reasoning, includes evidence, and establishes a word choice. His purpose is to encourage more people to begin reading again in order to maintain a higher intellectual level. He targets everyone essentially as his audience.

Gioia expresses reasoning in paragraph five to state that the decline in reading will lead to consequences and people will have a lower set of mental skills. He specifically states “the ability to create artistic and emotional ability...to craft a satisfying narrative,” will disappear if people no longer read. This causes the audience to think on a broader level and want to be able to express their talents.

Gioia also includes facts and statistics in paragraph six in order to capture the audience so they realize that intellectual state of peoples minds are actually dropping. He inserts, “poor reading skills ranked second, 38 percent of employers complained that local schools inadequately taught reading comprehension.” Gioia inserts this to grab people’s attention, people who teach, such as schools to be sure that children have good reading comprehension at an early age.

Finally Gioia displays proper word choice throughout the text to express the fact that having a good reading comprehension will broaden your vocabulary. He expresses the word intellectual multiple times for effect. Gioia expects that people will notice that they do need to read on past events as well as other counts to be able to relate to society.

Gioia’s goal is to reach out to his audience and to encourage them to read, and apply their intellectual abilities to their everyday life. He has a sense of hope that people express their abilities to grow and be fruitful with their social encounters.

# data[].field_overview.processed
In the article “Why literature matters” (2005) Dana Gioia expresses that American arts have changed and that many people are beginning to no longer read. He argues that intellectual abilities are decreacing. Gioia expresses reasoning, includes evidence, and establishes a word choice. His purpose is to encourage more people to begin reading again in order to maintain a higher intellectual level. He targets everyone essentially as his audience.

Gioia expresses reasoning in paragraph five to state that the decline in reading will lead to consequences and people will have a lower set of mental skills. He specifically states “the ability to create artistic and emotional ability...to craft a satisfying narrative,” will disappear if people no longer read. This causes the audience to think on a broader level and want to be able to express their talents.

Gioia also includes facts and statistics in paragraph six in order to capture the audience so they realize that intellectual state of peoples minds are actually dropping. He inserts, “poor reading skills ranked second, 38 percent of employers complained that local schools inadequately taught reading comprehension.” Gioia inserts this to grab people’s attention, people who teach, such as schools to be sure that children have good reading comprehension at an early age.

Finally Gioia displays proper word choice throughout the text to express the fact that having a good reading comprehension will broaden your vocabulary. He expresses the word intellectual multiple times for effect. Gioia expects that people will notice that they do need to read on past events as well as other counts to be able to relate to society.

Gioia’s goal is to reach out to his audience and to encourage them to read, and apply their intellectual abilities to their everyday life. He has a sense of hope that people express their abilities to grow and be fruitful with their social encounters.

# data[].field_overview.value
Dana Gioia claims that the decline of reading will have a negative impact on society. He uses persuasive techniques and provides the reader with credible facts backing up his claim.

Gioia states that during the past quarter century, American interest in literature has decreased. In 2002, a study showed that reading literature has declined, especially in young adults. A decline in reading has effected the business world tremendously. “In 2001, the National Association of Manufacturers polled its members on skill deficiencies. Poor reading skills ranked second, and 38 percent of employers complained that local schools inadequately taught reader comprehension” (Gioia 3). When you look at the decline of reading in the civic sphere, it has also had its consequences. “...literary readers are markedly more civically engaged than nonreaders, scoring two to four times more likely to perform charity work, visit a museum, or attend a sporting event” (Gioia 3). Gioia uses many factual examples of the negative consequences due to the decrease in literary skills. Providing the reader with many examples creates ethos. The author is a credible source of information which makes the passage believable and effective. Gioia also uses quotations from different sources such as Wired Magazine, National Conference of State Legislatures, National Association of Manufacturers, “Reading at Risk”, and National Endowment for the Arts. All of these sources give a variety of facts and information, but all agree on the same thing: that there has been a decline in literature. This is a good use of literary techniques because it backs up what Gioia is trying to prove to the audience.

Gioia uses various stylistic elements to add power to the ideas expressed. His word choice greatly impacts his essay by better explaining his topic in a more detailed and interesting way. In the first paragraph, Gioia describes how income, college attendence, and access to information all increased by using words such as ballooned, enormously, and unforeseen. When he describes literature, he simply says it diminished. His word choice shows a great spectrum of where literature lies compared to the other three. In paragraph three, Gioia states, “That individuals at a time of crucial intellectual and emotional development bypass the joys and challenges of literature is a troubling trend” (Gioia 2). By using the words crucial, emotional, and joys, Gioia convinces the reader that it is important to have literary skills and those who don’t are missing out. Using particular words allows Gioia to more easily persuade the audience to agree with his point of view. Gioia builds an arguement based on facts and a variety of sources that agree with his stance on literature. His word choice and knowledge of the subject both play a huge role when defending his claim. The audience is more likely to take his side if they feel he is passionate and well informed on the subject, which he proves to be.

# data[].field_overview.processed
Dana Gioia claims that the decline of reading will have a negative impact on society. He uses persuasive techniques and provides the reader with credible facts backing up his claim.

Gioia states that during the past quarter century, American interest in literature has decreased. In 2002, a study showed that reading literature has declined, especially in young adults. A decline in reading has effected the business world tremendously. “In 2001, the National Association of Manufacturers polled its members on skill deficiencies. Poor reading skills ranked second, and 38 percent of employers complained that local schools inadequately taught reader comprehension” (Gioia 3). When you look at the decline of reading in the civic sphere, it has also had its consequences. “...literary readers are markedly more civically engaged than nonreaders, scoring two to four times more likely to perform charity work, visit a museum, or attend a sporting event” (Gioia 3). Gioia uses many factual examples of the negative consequences due to the decrease in literary skills. Providing the reader with many examples creates ethos. The author is a credible source of information which makes the passage believable and effective. Gioia also uses quotations from different sources such as Wired Magazine, National Conference of State Legislatures, National Association of Manufacturers, “Reading at Risk”, and National Endowment for the Arts. All of these sources give a variety of facts and information, but all agree on the same thing: that there has been a decline in literature. This is a good use of literary techniques because it backs up what Gioia is trying to prove to the audience.

Gioia uses various stylistic elements to add power to the ideas expressed. His word choice greatly impacts his essay by better explaining his topic in a more detailed and interesting way. In the first paragraph, Gioia describes how income, college attendence, and access to information all increased by using words such as ballooned, enormously, and unforeseen. When he describes literature, he simply says it diminished. His word choice shows a great spectrum of where literature lies compared to the other three. In paragraph three, Gioia states, “That individuals at a time of crucial intellectual and emotional development bypass the joys and challenges of literature is a troubling trend” (Gioia 2). By using the words crucial, emotional, and joys, Gioia convinces the reader that it is important to have literary skills and those who don’t are missing out. Using particular words allows Gioia to more easily persuade the audience to agree with his point of view. Gioia builds an arguement based on facts and a variety of sources that agree with his stance on literature. His word choice and knowledge of the subject both play a huge role when defending his claim. The audience is more likely to take his side if they feel he is passionate and well informed on the subject, which he proves to be.

# data[].field_overview.value
Stepping outside, a person in the United States can instantly see how prevalent a role technology has in our lives. From the smart phones that connect people globally trough a few touches on the screen, to the airplanes roaring across the sky, the astounding capabilities and convenience that technology offers is unmatched. In “Why literature matters”, an article from the New York Times Corporation by Dana Gioia, Gioia explores how living in the high-tech 21st century has unfortunately deteriorated the percentage of Americans who read literature. Gioia is able to sway his audience to devote more time to the simple task of reading works of intellectual value through fearful diction and compelling consequences associated with being illiterate.

Through his article, Gioia implements fearful diction to express his concern that America’s future is in the hands of those who are less informed and comprehending of situations; economic and social. By labeling the diminished percentage of those who read as “worrisome” and “troubling” Gioia is able to convey the negativity of the lack of literacy. Upon reading the article, and mulling over how Gioia feels about America’s current reading levels, a reader is inclined to acknowledge that illiteracy is detrimental to American society and something that needs to be repaired; the point Gioia was trying to impose.

Also in the article, Gioia reveals to the audience the consequences of this trend. By exposing the domino effect of illiteracy into other large aspects of American society such as electing leaders, and the business world, Gioia succeeds in alarming the audience to the seriousness of the issue and instilling a sense of urgency to mend the problem. Although the facts alone are eye-opening to any reader, by backing the facts up with big name organizations like “The National Association of Manufacturers” and the “National Conference of State Legislatures”, Gioia is able to cement his argument and therefore be more empowered in persuading his audience on the importance of reading.

Lastly, Gioia’s target audience plays a major role in achieving the goal to propel his argument into a plan of action. Writing for the New York Times, Gioia can likely expect his audience to be educated and even have some influence in American society. By appealing his argument to people who are in control of others who are a part of the illiterate population, Gioia can put faith into the hope that his audience will make the problem he presented a solution. An example of this would be if a school board official were to read his article, and then decided the matter to be so pressing that he/she took the necessary actions to propose rules for his/her respective school district. Due to the profound impact Gioia’s article can have on a large quality of Americans, his argument is strengthened exponentially.

Ultimately, Gioia is able to relay a strong and persuasive argument regarding the decline of Americans reading and why it needs to be fixed through concerned word choice, compelling consequences, and masterfully writing to inspire a specific audience.

# data[].field_overview.processed
Stepping outside, a person in the United States can instantly see how prevalent a role technology has in our lives. From the smart phones that connect people globally trough a few touches on the screen, to the airplanes roaring across the sky, the astounding capabilities and convenience that technology offers is unmatched. In “Why literature matters”, an article from the New York Times Corporation by Dana Gioia, Gioia explores how living in the high-tech 21st century has unfortunately deteriorated the percentage of Americans who read literature. Gioia is able to sway his audience to devote more time to the simple task of reading works of intellectual value through fearful diction and compelling consequences associated with being illiterate.

Through his article, Gioia implements fearful diction to express his concern that America’s future is in the hands of those who are less informed and comprehending of situations; economic and social. By labeling the diminished percentage of those who read as “worrisome” and “troubling” Gioia is able to convey the negativity of the lack of literacy. Upon reading the article, and mulling over how Gioia feels about America’s current reading levels, a reader is inclined to acknowledge that illiteracy is detrimental to American society and something that needs to be repaired; the point Gioia was trying to impose.

Also in the article, Gioia reveals to the audience the consequences of this trend. By exposing the domino effect of illiteracy into other large aspects of American society such as electing leaders, and the business world, Gioia succeeds in alarming the audience to the seriousness of the issue and instilling a sense of urgency to mend the problem. Although the facts alone are eye-opening to any reader, by backing the facts up with big name organizations like “The National Association of Manufacturers” and the “National Conference of State Legislatures”, Gioia is able to cement his argument and therefore be more empowered in persuading his audience on the importance of reading.

Lastly, Gioia’s target audience plays a major role in achieving the goal to propel his argument into a plan of action. Writing for the New York Times, Gioia can likely expect his audience to be educated and even have some influence in American society. By appealing his argument to people who are in control of others who are a part of the illiterate population, Gioia can put faith into the hope that his audience will make the problem he presented a solution. An example of this would be if a school board official were to read his article, and then decided the matter to be so pressing that he/she took the necessary actions to propose rules for his/her respective school district. Due to the profound impact Gioia’s article can have on a large quality of Americans, his argument is strengthened exponentially.

Ultimately, Gioia is able to relay a strong and persuasive argument regarding the decline of Americans reading and why it needs to be fixed through concerned word choice, compelling consequences, and masterfully writing to inspire a specific audience.

# data[].field_overview.value
From the very beginning of this passage, we can see that author, Dana Gioia, has a concern with literary knowledge declining; even the title shows his concern. Gioia uses evidence, reasoning, and diction to persuade us to agree with him on three points, that literary knowledge is declining, that literary knowledge is very important, and that consequences shall ensue if nothing is done about our apathy towards literature.

Gioia cites the 2002 Survey of Public Participation in the Arts on the fact that “arts participation by Americans has declined for eight of the nine major forms that are measured.” One percentage Gioia noted as particularly staggering was the decline in reading literature. Not only that, but Gioia also brings up that the Arts Endowment issued the reading portion of the survey as a seperate report. Since Gioia is mainly using facts in this key point, and not opinions, evidence is used instead of reasoning, however, he did use distinct diction. Stating that he findings in the study are not only ‘severe’, but also ‘worrisome’. Adjectives like this add more weight to his words.

Gioia’s next key point is just how important literature is. Gioia states that “the significance of reading has become a persistent them in the new business world,” and also cites multiple quotes buy Wired Magazine explaining how people with literary knowledge are better suited for the business world. That leaders seek “the ability to create artistic and emotional beauty” is more important than “linear, logical, and analytic talents”. Gioia even puts in a worker’s perspective from the 2001 National Association of Manufacturers poll. Evidence showed reading was the 2nd highest deficiency amongst workers, and that “38 percent of employers complained that local schools inadequately taught reading comprehension”. For reasoning, Gioia purposely used evidence that is very relative to the common man or woman, especially relative to younger Americans by saying “That individuals at a time of crucial intellectual and emotional development bypass the joys and challenges.” (notice how joys and challenges is said to further praise literature, and persuade the reader)... “of literature is a troubling trend,” again using diction to further persuade readers.

As a closing point, Gioia touches on the consequences of illiteracy. “The decline of literary reading foreshadows serious long term social and economic problems” That is Gioia’s main point on these consequences, and uses evidence in the previous paragraph to support it. Gioia mentions the surprising finding in “Reading at Risk” that literary readers are markedly more civically engaged than nonreaders. In his final paragraph, Gioia states that as we lose our literary intelligence “our nation becomes less informed, active, and independent minded”, and that these qualities we as a nation “cannot afford to lose.” These bold statements hammer in to the reader just how significant literature really is, in many different aspects of our life.

This persuasive passage used enough evidence, reasoning, and careful diction to not only make readers take a stance on literacy, but also provoke readers to take action on what he seemingly considers an epidemic that is truly detrimental to the nation.

# data[].field_overview.processed
From the very beginning of this passage, we can see that author, Dana Gioia, has a concern with literary knowledge declining; even the title shows his concern. Gioia uses evidence, reasoning, and diction to persuade us to agree with him on three points, that literary knowledge is declining, that literary knowledge is very important, and that consequences shall ensue if nothing is done about our apathy towards literature.

Gioia cites the 2002 Survey of Public Participation in the Arts on the fact that “arts participation by Americans has declined for eight of the nine major forms that are measured.” One percentage Gioia noted as particularly staggering was the decline in reading literature. Not only that, but Gioia also brings up that the Arts Endowment issued the reading portion of the survey as a seperate report. Since Gioia is mainly using facts in this key point, and not opinions, evidence is used instead of reasoning, however, he did use distinct diction. Stating that he findings in the study are not only ‘severe’, but also ‘worrisome’. Adjectives like this add more weight to his words.

Gioia’s next key point is just how important literature is. Gioia states that “the significance of reading has become a persistent them in the new business world,” and also cites multiple quotes buy Wired Magazine explaining how people with literary knowledge are better suited for the business world. That leaders seek “the ability to create artistic and emotional beauty” is more important than “linear, logical, and analytic talents”. Gioia even puts in a worker’s perspective from the 2001 National Association of Manufacturers poll. Evidence showed reading was the 2nd highest deficiency amongst workers, and that “38 percent of employers complained that local schools inadequately taught reading comprehension”. For reasoning, Gioia purposely used evidence that is very relative to the common man or woman, especially relative to younger Americans by saying “That individuals at a time of crucial intellectual and emotional development bypass the joys and challenges.” (notice how joys and challenges is said to further praise literature, and persuade the reader)... “of literature is a troubling trend,” again using diction to further persuade readers.

As a closing point, Gioia touches on the consequences of illiteracy. “The decline of literary reading foreshadows serious long term social and economic problems” That is Gioia’s main point on these consequences, and uses evidence in the previous paragraph to support it. Gioia mentions the surprising finding in “Reading at Risk” that literary readers are markedly more civically engaged than nonreaders. In his final paragraph, Gioia states that as we lose our literary intelligence “our nation becomes less informed, active, and independent minded”, and that these qualities we as a nation “cannot afford to lose.” These bold statements hammer in to the reader just how significant literature really is, in many different aspects of our life.

This persuasive passage used enough evidence, reasoning, and careful diction to not only make readers take a stance on literacy, but also provoke readers to take action on what he seemingly considers an epidemic that is truly detrimental to the nation.

# data[].field_overview.value
In the article, “Why Literature Matters” by Dana Gioia, Gioia makes an argument claiming that the levels of interest young Americans have shown in art in recent years have declined and that this trend is a severe problem with broad consequences. Strategies Gioia employs to support his argument include citation of compelling polls, reports made by prominent organizations that have issued studies, and a quotation from a prominent author. Gioia’s overall purpose in writing this article appears to be to draw attention towards shortcomings in American participation in the arts. His primary audience would be the American public in general with a significant focus on millenials.

In his introduction paragraph, Gioia employs a distinct contrast with several listed positive changes in American life such as increased college attendance and increases in income, with the focus of his article: the fact that the interest young Americans show in art has declined. This tool is utilized to establish an emphasis on his primary point by highlighting it as a negative development relative to other changes in American life. This literary tool serves a strong purpose by acting as a vehicle to draw the audience into the principle issue addressed by the writing.

In paragraph 5, Gioia utilizes a synergistic reference to two separate sources of information that serves to provide a stronger compilation of support for his main topic. By citing a quotation from author Daniel Pinks who states, that the talents individuals require for success in the 21st Century are not, “linear, logical, analytic talents,” but ones that provide, “the ability to create artistic and emotional beauty, to detect patterns and opportunities,” and “to craft a satisfying narrative,” Gioia is able to build his point with the agreement of a respected individual. He then immediately follows with a statement that business leaders like to see, “imagination, creativity, and higher order thinking” as qualities for individuals in management positions. This dual utilization of claims from two separate sources conveys to Gioia’s audience the sense that the skills built through immersion in the arts are vital to succeeding in the modern workplace which aids in logically leading his audience to the conclusion that a loss of experience with the arts may foreshadow troubling results.

In paragraph 6, Gioia follows up on the point established in paragraph 5 by introducing a negative example of the consequences of loss of the arts with a focus on literacy. Gioia cites a 2001 poll on the National Association of American Manufactures stating stating that poor reading skills ranked second among its employees surveyed for skill deficiencies while 38% of employees believed local schools inadequately taught reading comprehension. Gioias presentation of a numerical statistic based on a major employer adds significant logical weight to his argument by providing an example of the effects of a deficit in experience with art and literature. This may effect his audience by providing a more accurrate depiction of the true problems caused by disconnection with arts while possibly choosing an example they could personally relate to.

Overall, Gioia provides an strong logical argument that disconnection with the arts is troubling for America. He employs strong logical connections and establishes real-world foundations for his point.

# data[].field_overview.processed
In the article, “Why Literature Matters” by Dana Gioia, Gioia makes an argument claiming that the levels of interest young Americans have shown in art in recent years have declined and that this trend is a severe problem with broad consequences. Strategies Gioia employs to support his argument include citation of compelling polls, reports made by prominent organizations that have issued studies, and a quotation from a prominent author. Gioia’s overall purpose in writing this article appears to be to draw attention towards shortcomings in American participation in the arts. His primary audience would be the American public in general with a significant focus on millenials.

In his introduction paragraph, Gioia employs a distinct contrast with several listed positive changes in American life such as increased college attendance and increases in income, with the focus of his article: the fact that the interest young Americans show in art has declined. This tool is utilized to establish an emphasis on his primary point by highlighting it as a negative development relative to other changes in American life. This literary tool serves a strong purpose by acting as a vehicle to draw the audience into the principle issue addressed by the writing.

In paragraph 5, Gioia utilizes a synergistic reference to two separate sources of information that serves to provide a stronger compilation of support for his main topic. By citing a quotation from author Daniel Pinks who states, that the talents individuals require for success in the 21st Century are not, “linear, logical, analytic talents,” but ones that provide, “the ability to create artistic and emotional beauty, to detect patterns and opportunities,” and “to craft a satisfying narrative,” Gioia is able to build his point with the agreement of a respected individual. He then immediately follows with a statement that business leaders like to see, “imagination, creativity, and higher order thinking” as qualities for individuals in management positions. This dual utilization of claims from two separate sources conveys to Gioia’s audience the sense that the skills built through immersion in the arts are vital to succeeding in the modern workplace which aids in logically leading his audience to the conclusion that a loss of experience with the arts may foreshadow troubling results.

In paragraph 6, Gioia follows up on the point established in paragraph 5 by introducing a negative example of the consequences of loss of the arts with a focus on literacy. Gioia cites a 2001 poll on the National Association of American Manufactures stating stating that poor reading skills ranked second among its employees surveyed for skill deficiencies while 38% of employees believed local schools inadequately taught reading comprehension. Gioias presentation of a numerical statistic based on a major employer adds significant logical weight to his argument by providing an example of the effects of a deficit in experience with art and literature. This may effect his audience by providing a more accurrate depiction of the true problems caused by disconnection with arts while possibly choosing an example they could personally relate to.

Overall, Gioia provides an strong logical argument that disconnection with the arts is troubling for America. He employs strong logical connections and establishes real-world foundations for his point.

# data[].field_overview.value
Adam B. Summers wrote an article about why plastic bag should not be banned from the grocery stores. This article proves that Summers built an argument to persuade his audience. Because his article gave out facts and details. Also, that it expanded on the reason why we need them. Finally, that the article explains how it would affect us.

The first reason is that the article explain as to why it would affect us. It could affect the use of carrying items. Plastic bags are useful do to the fact that it carries a lot more items than paper bags. That it can support the weight of the items. Plastic bags are more useful in any kind of way.

# data[].field_overview.processed
Adam B. Summers wrote an article about why plastic bag should not be banned from the grocery stores. This article proves that Summers built an argument to persuade his audience. Because his article gave out facts and details. Also, that it expanded on the reason why we need them. Finally, that the article explains how it would affect us.

The first reason is that the article explain as to why it would affect us. It could affect the use of carrying items. Plastic bags are useful do to the fact that it carries a lot more items than paper bags. That it can support the weight of the items. Plastic bags are more useful in any kind of way.

# data[].field_overview.value
Adams B. Summers argues what the damages of a proposed plastic bag ban would do if the legislation gets passed. Summers presents his argument well, and his use of fact/examples, reasoning to devolope ideas, and persuasive word choice build his argument. He uses examples/facts, such as plastic bags only make up 1.6 percent of all solid waste. His excellent word choice that appeals to your mind such as him saying the politician hopes to bring up the bill again to essentially “recycle rather than trash it”. He uses reasoning that makes sense to a reader stating how many jobs may be potentially lost due to the bill and how much waste is really caused by plastic bags v. paper.

# data[].field_overview.processed
Adams B. Summers argues what the damages of a proposed plastic bag ban would do if the legislation gets passed. Summers presents his argument well, and his use of fact/examples, reasoning to devolope ideas, and persuasive word choice build his argument. He uses examples/facts, such as plastic bags only make up 1.6 percent of all solid waste. His excellent word choice that appeals to your mind such as him saying the politician hopes to bring up the bill again to essentially “recycle rather than trash it”. He uses reasoning that makes sense to a reader stating how many jobs may be potentially lost due to the bill and how much waste is really caused by plastic bags v. paper.

# data[].field_overview.value
Adam B. Summers builds an argument to persuade his audience that plastic shopping bags should not be banned by finding good evidence, getting his audience attention, and by being confident about what he going against. Why else would someone else get audience?

Adam B. Summers did a good job of finding good evidence to support what he didn’t want to see happen. In the article every paragraph had some type of evidence whether he agreed with it or disagreed with it. He also brought up good points like the fact that tax payers would have to pay money to actually get new bags to be put in every store. Bringing this up will get tax payers on his side. I don’t think the tax payers would like that because seeing that they have to pay for new bags in stores when stores already have bags, they rather pay for something they that will actually invest like for their kids school instead of something thats going to be wasted anyway. Summers also made another point about 2,000 of people would lose their jobs if they take away took away plastic bags. Why would people risk their jobs and then pay taxs for what made them lose their job in the first place? Plastic bags are also easier to recycle, everybody recycle their plastic bags. Using paper bags

# data[].field_overview.processed
Adam B. Summers builds an argument to persuade his audience that plastic shopping bags should not be banned by finding good evidence, getting his audience attention, and by being confident about what he going against. Why else would someone else get audience?

Adam B. Summers did a good job of finding good evidence to support what he didn’t want to see happen. In the article every paragraph had some type of evidence whether he agreed with it or disagreed with it. He also brought up good points like the fact that tax payers would have to pay money to actually get new bags to be put in every store. Bringing this up will get tax payers on his side. I don’t think the tax payers would like that because seeing that they have to pay for new bags in stores when stores already have bags, they rather pay for something they that will actually invest like for their kids school instead of something thats going to be wasted anyway. Summers also made another point about 2,000 of people would lose their jobs if they take away took away plastic bags. Why would people risk their jobs and then pay taxs for what made them lose their job in the first place? Plastic bags are also easier to recycle, everybody recycle their plastic bags. Using paper bags

# data[].field_overview.value
Adam B. Summers brings up several good points as to why plastic shoping bags should not be banned. He explains how the EPA says all plastic bags only make up 1.6 percent of all waste, and plastic shoping bags only contribute 0.3 percent to all the waste. The bags hardly make up any waste and require less energy to make compared to paper or cotton bags. Plastic bags produce fewer greenhouse gasses, 80 percent less waste and less water to make them over paper or cotton reusable bags. Reusable bags also have a higher risk of giving a consumer food poising because of bacteria left in them and then the bags are used again.

Plastic bags are also called “single use” bags, but that is not true because people re-use them for garabge bags. By cutting of plastic shoping bags people would by more garabge bags wich are plastic so it would defeat the purpose. eliminating plastic bags would also cause the people who make them and dispose them lose their jobs too. Enviornmentalist can try to convince people paper is better than plastic but people should also look at it from the other prespective, and choose, “Paper or Plastic?”.

# data[].field_overview.processed
Adam B. Summers brings up several good points as to why plastic shoping bags should not be banned. He explains how the EPA says all plastic bags only make up 1.6 percent of all waste, and plastic shoping bags only contribute 0.3 percent to all the waste. The bags hardly make up any waste and require less energy to make compared to paper or cotton bags. Plastic bags produce fewer greenhouse gasses, 80 percent less waste and less water to make them over paper or cotton reusable bags. Reusable bags also have a higher risk of giving a consumer food poising because of bacteria left in them and then the bags are used again.

Plastic bags are also called “single use” bags, but that is not true because people re-use them for garabge bags. By cutting of plastic shoping bags people would by more garabge bags wich are plastic so it would defeat the purpose. eliminating plastic bags would also cause the people who make them and dispose them lose their jobs too. Enviornmentalist can try to convince people paper is better than plastic but people should also look at it from the other prespective, and choose, “Paper or Plastic?”.

# data[].field_overview.value
In Adam B Summers’ essay he gives valid reasons why plastic bags should not be banned. His essay is persuasive in many ways such as focusing on the effect on the earth and also job cutting. He also gives alternative ways to use a plastic bag. Summers gives examples on how banning plastic bags can lead to worse human damage.

Summers states that a plastic bag is easy to make without using much of anything. Knowing that making a plastic bag takes up to 70% less energy and can also help our earth because it doesn’t produce green house gases. Saying this part persuades the earth lovers and it persuades them to side with the no bag ban because it’s not as harmful as the reusible bags.

Reusible bags are more harmful than anyone could think and when Summers put in the facts that people die from food born illnesses it catches the doctors and people who care about the well being of others his essay persuades them to not only use the plastic bags but to use cation when using reusible bags because of the illnesses and deaths.

There are many ways to use a plastic bag not just for groceries and when Adam Summers states this it focuses on the renew and reusers where can use plastic bags in the home and daily life. Also being a cheaper alternative. Summers states that the banning of plastic bags will cost the jobs of 2000 people which to the companies and workers this is a valid argument if they want to keep their jobs.

Summers provides multiple ways to persuade some one and any one with different beliefs. This build many persusive arguments and cause and effects fact based conclusions.

# data[].field_overview.processed
In Adam B Summers’ essay he gives valid reasons why plastic bags should not be banned. His essay is persuasive in many ways such as focusing on the effect on the earth and also job cutting. He also gives alternative ways to use a plastic bag. Summers gives examples on how banning plastic bags can lead to worse human damage.

Summers states that a plastic bag is easy to make without using much of anything. Knowing that making a plastic bag takes up to 70% less energy and can also help our earth because it doesn’t produce green house gases. Saying this part persuades the earth lovers and it persuades them to side with the no bag ban because it’s not as harmful as the reusible bags.

Reusible bags are more harmful than anyone could think and when Summers put in the facts that people die from food born illnesses it catches the doctors and people who care about the well being of others his essay persuades them to not only use the plastic bags but to use cation when using reusible bags because of the illnesses and deaths.

There are many ways to use a plastic bag not just for groceries and when Adam Summers states this it focuses on the renew and reusers where can use plastic bags in the home and daily life. Also being a cheaper alternative. Summers states that the banning of plastic bags will cost the jobs of 2000 people which to the companies and workers this is a valid argument if they want to keep their jobs.

Summers provides multiple ways to persuade some one and any one with different beliefs. This build many persusive arguments and cause and effects fact based conclusions.

# data[].field_overview.value
The style and features an author use can help persuade the audience if clearly used. Adam B. Summers in the essay “Bag ban bad for freedom and environment” uses factual evidence, word choice, and emotion to build his argument. In doing this, Summers successfully persuades his audience into believing “Paper or Plastic” is a personal right.

When using factual evidence, Summers further persuades his reader. Readers are often attracted to facts because they are hard evidence to proving a point. Summers touches upon how plastic bag waste makes up only 0.3 percent out of the 1.6 percent of all munciple solid waste products. By providing this fact Summers shows the low numbered statistics which persuade the reader. The reader sees the small numbers and is immediately taking the authors side. Another use of factual evidence is when Summers discusses Ireland’s problem since they’ve banned the use of plastic bags. By adding in the effects this had on another country, the audience realizes the same situation could happen in California, causing the reader to further his mind to Summer’s ideas.

The word choice Summers uses helps lure his readers into his argument. In the first paragraph, Summers uses words such as “dodged”, “narrowly”, and “down”. The usage of words makes the reader feel as if he is in the actual voting process of the bill, taking the rocky road in state government only to get voted down. From the start, Summers makes the audience feel involved which intrigues the reader further. In the second to last paragraph, Summers plays with the phrases “weather the storm” and “pony up” to represent the possibilities to come if a bill banning plastic bags is passed. By telling the reader to “get ready”, he puts a negative feeling to the future of the bill and persuades the reader into thinking that the future may not be something they like.

Summers also adds in personal emotion to make the reader feel connected to the author. He writes “I love sea turtles as much as the next guy” to show that he is human too and cares about nature. The claim would touch many readers who are in the same position as Summers; they love nature but think the banning of plastic bags is unreasonable. Summers connects to all readers in his audience when he further helps

# data[].field_overview.processed
The style and features an author use can help persuade the audience if clearly used. Adam B. Summers in the essay “Bag ban bad for freedom and environment” uses factual evidence, word choice, and emotion to build his argument. In doing this, Summers successfully persuades his audience into believing “Paper or Plastic” is a personal right.

When using factual evidence, Summers further persuades his reader. Readers are often attracted to facts because they are hard evidence to proving a point. Summers touches upon how plastic bag waste makes up only 0.3 percent out of the 1.6 percent of all munciple solid waste products. By providing this fact Summers shows the low numbered statistics which persuade the reader. The reader sees the small numbers and is immediately taking the authors side. Another use of factual evidence is when Summers discusses Ireland’s problem since they’ve banned the use of plastic bags. By adding in the effects this had on another country, the audience realizes the same situation could happen in California, causing the reader to further his mind to Summer’s ideas.

The word choice Summers uses helps lure his readers into his argument. In the first paragraph, Summers uses words such as “dodged”, “narrowly”, and “down”. The usage of words makes the reader feel as if he is in the actual voting process of the bill, taking the rocky road in state government only to get voted down. From the start, Summers makes the audience feel involved which intrigues the reader further. In the second to last paragraph, Summers plays with the phrases “weather the storm” and “pony up” to represent the possibilities to come if a bill banning plastic bags is passed. By telling the reader to “get ready”, he puts a negative feeling to the future of the bill and persuades the reader into thinking that the future may not be something they like.

Summers also adds in personal emotion to make the reader feel connected to the author. He writes “I love sea turtles as much as the next guy” to show that he is human too and cares about nature. The claim would touch many readers who are in the same position as Summers; they love nature but think the banning of plastic bags is unreasonable. Summers connects to all readers in his audience when he further helps

# data[].field_overview.value
In the wake of environmental concerns in the United States, a bill in California which would ban plastic bags for groceries failed to make it through the state Senate by a small margin. In his article “Bag ban bad for freedom and environment” (2013), Adam Summers asserts that the plastic bag ban would be harmful for consumers and the environment. He conveys this through citing statistics, appealing to the audience’s emotions and sense of self-interests, and utilizing sarcastic diction. The intended audience for this article is primarily readers who support the proposed bag ban and intend to help it pass.

The author’s statistics cited throughout the article reinforce his argument and provide a solid base. In the fourth paragraph he mentions the most common plastic grocery bags, which “make up just 0.3 percent of solid municipal waste materials. The author also cites the “77 percent increase in the sale of plastic trash can liner bags” as a result of a similar ban in Ireland. These statistics appeal to the reader’s logic and ensure that they can follow a logical path to support the author and oppose the ban. The statistics provide solid evidence that are enhanced by the numbers and cannot be easily argued against.

The author’s patriotic asides in the first and final paragraphs appeal to the audience’s emotions and self-interests. In the first paragraph, the author talks of the rights the government has impeded and talks of a regulation of “what kind of container we can use to carry our groceries.” In the final paragraph, the author talks of the fundamental rights to decide “paper or plastic.” This causes the readers to feel violated by the government and want to look out for his rights. When the regulations start to harm the individuals themselves, then they are more likely to take measures to oppose the bill.

The author’s sarcastic tone throughout the article conveys the conception that those people supporting this bill are misinformed and incorrect. In the sixth paragraph, the author says “The claims that plastic bags are worse for the environment than paper bags or cotton reusable bags are dubious at best.” He also leads the reader to infer that supporters of the bill believe plastic bags are “evil incarnate” and “use government force to compel people to live the way they think best.” In the first paragraph, the author talks of how “Californians dodged yet another nanny-state regulation.” This sarcastic tone causes the audience to lose faith in these Environmentalists. It also causes the reader to question the motives of the bill and its supporters.

Through citing statistics, appealing to self-interest and emotions, and utilizing sarcastic diction, Adam Summers conveys his beliefs that California should not pass a law banning plastic grocery bags.

# data[].field_overview.processed
In the wake of environmental concerns in the United States, a bill in California which would ban plastic bags for groceries failed to make it through the state Senate by a small margin. In his article “Bag ban bad for freedom and environment” (2013), Adam Summers asserts that the plastic bag ban would be harmful for consumers and the environment. He conveys this through citing statistics, appealing to the audience’s emotions and sense of self-interests, and utilizing sarcastic diction. The intended audience for this article is primarily readers who support the proposed bag ban and intend to help it pass.

The author’s statistics cited throughout the article reinforce his argument and provide a solid base. In the fourth paragraph he mentions the most common plastic grocery bags, which “make up just 0.3 percent of solid municipal waste materials. The author also cites the “77 percent increase in the sale of plastic trash can liner bags” as a result of a similar ban in Ireland. These statistics appeal to the reader’s logic and ensure that they can follow a logical path to support the author and oppose the ban. The statistics provide solid evidence that are enhanced by the numbers and cannot be easily argued against.

The author’s patriotic asides in the first and final paragraphs appeal to the audience’s emotions and self-interests. In the first paragraph, the author talks of the rights the government has impeded and talks of a regulation of “what kind of container we can use to carry our groceries.” In the final paragraph, the author talks of the fundamental rights to decide “paper or plastic.” This causes the readers to feel violated by the government and want to look out for his rights. When the regulations start to harm the individuals themselves, then they are more likely to take measures to oppose the bill.

The author’s sarcastic tone throughout the article conveys the conception that those people supporting this bill are misinformed and incorrect. In the sixth paragraph, the author says “The claims that plastic bags are worse for the environment than paper bags or cotton reusable bags are dubious at best.” He also leads the reader to infer that supporters of the bill believe plastic bags are “evil incarnate” and “use government force to compel people to live the way they think best.” In the first paragraph, the author talks of how “Californians dodged yet another nanny-state regulation.” This sarcastic tone causes the audience to lose faith in these Environmentalists. It also causes the reader to question the motives of the bill and its supporters.

Through citing statistics, appealing to self-interest and emotions, and utilizing sarcastic diction, Adam Summers conveys his beliefs that California should not pass a law banning plastic grocery bags.

# data[].field_overview.value
In Adam B. Summers’ “Bag ban bad for freedom and environment” editorial for the San Diego Union-Tribune, he argues against the possible laws hindering Californians from using plastic bags at grocery stores. He believes they would do more harm than good, and that “a little reason and perspective is in order.” By the end of this piece the reader will likely find themselves nodding in agreement with what Summers has to say, and this isn’t just because he’s right. Summers, like any good writer, employs tactical reasoning and persuasive devices to plead with the audience to take his side. In this article, he demonstrates many such devices.

“Plastic bags ... make up only about 1.6 percent of all municipal solid waste materials,” Summers ventures, his first utilization of a cold, hard fact. The truth in the numbers is undeniable, and he cites his sources promptly, making the statement that much more authentic. Knowledge is often viewed as power, and with information as direct as a statistic, Summers is handing that power to the reader – the power to agree with him. Not only does Summers spread the facts with numbers, he also does so with trends. He talks about the price increase in Ireland, and the documented health hazards of reusable bags. He uses the truth, backed by reliable sources, to infiltrate the readers’ independent mind. His thoroughness in this regard carefully builds his argument against this piece of legislation, and this is just one of the many ways he spreads his opposition.

Additionally, Summers appeals to the ethical and emotional side of individuals. With key phrases like “taxpayers will have to pony up” and “borne by consumers,” Summers activates the nature of a human to act in their own self-interest. While one might view this as selfish, Summers reassures the reader that they are not alone in feeling this way, further contributing to his argument. With his statement that he “love[s] sea turtles as much as the next guy,” Summers adds acceptance to those who don’t care to act with regard for the environment. By putting himself beside the reader as a typical consumer, he equals them, and makes himself more likeable in the process. Appealing to environmentalists, too, Summers qualifies that they “have every right to try to convince people to adopt certain beliefs or lifestyles, but they do not have the right to use government force...” A statement such as this is an attempt to get readers of either persuasion on his side, and his ingenius qualification only adds to the strength of his argument.

An article focusing on the choice between “paper or plastic,” and how that choice might be taken away certainly seems fairly standard, but by adjusting his diction (i.e. using well known phrases, selecting words with strong connotations), Summers creates something out of the ordinary. It is with word choice such as “recycled rather than trashed” that the author reveals the legislations intent to stir up a repeat bill. Because the issue at hand is one of waste and environmental protection, his humorous diction provides a link between he and the audience, revealing not only an opportunity to laugh, but also reinforcement of the concept that Summers is trustworthy and just like everyone else. Negative words with specifically poor connotations also aid Summers in his persuasive struggle. “Reprieve,” “dubious,” “bureaucracy,” and “evil incarnate” all depict a disparaging tone of annoyance and anger, surely helping Summers to spread his message.

It is through many rhetorical devices that Summers sells his argument. Powerful diction, qualification, ethos, pathos, logos, and informative facts all contribute to an exceptionally well-written argument. It is his utilization of these practices and more that make this article worthy of recognition. Once one reads the piece, they’ll be nodding along in accordance with Summers, and it isn’t for no reason.

# data[].field_overview.processed
In Adam B. Summers’ “Bag ban bad for freedom and environment” editorial for the San Diego Union-Tribune, he argues against the possible laws hindering Californians from using plastic bags at grocery stores. He believes they would do more harm than good, and that “a little reason and perspective is in order.” By the end of this piece the reader will likely find themselves nodding in agreement with what Summers has to say, and this isn’t just because he’s right. Summers, like any good writer, employs tactical reasoning and persuasive devices to plead with the audience to take his side. In this article, he demonstrates many such devices.

“Plastic bags ... make up only about 1.6 percent of all municipal solid waste materials,” Summers ventures, his first utilization of a cold, hard fact. The truth in the numbers is undeniable, and he cites his sources promptly, making the statement that much more authentic. Knowledge is often viewed as power, and with information as direct as a statistic, Summers is handing that power to the reader – the power to agree with him. Not only does Summers spread the facts with numbers, he also does so with trends. He talks about the price increase in Ireland, and the documented health hazards of reusable bags. He uses the truth, backed by reliable sources, to infiltrate the readers’ independent mind. His thoroughness in this regard carefully builds his argument against this piece of legislation, and this is just one of the many ways he spreads his opposition.

Additionally, Summers appeals to the ethical and emotional side of individuals. With key phrases like “taxpayers will have to pony up” and “borne by consumers,” Summers activates the nature of a human to act in their own self-interest. While one might view this as selfish, Summers reassures the reader that they are not alone in feeling this way, further contributing to his argument. With his statement that he “love[s] sea turtles as much as the next guy,” Summers adds acceptance to those who don’t care to act with regard for the environment. By putting himself beside the reader as a typical consumer, he equals them, and makes himself more likeable in the process. Appealing to environmentalists, too, Summers qualifies that they “have every right to try to convince people to adopt certain beliefs or lifestyles, but they do not have the right to use government force...” A statement such as this is an attempt to get readers of either persuasion on his side, and his ingenius qualification only adds to the strength of his argument.

An article focusing on the choice between “paper or plastic,” and how that choice might be taken away certainly seems fairly standard, but by adjusting his diction (i.e. using well known phrases, selecting words with strong connotations), Summers creates something out of the ordinary. It is with word choice such as “recycled rather than trashed” that the author reveals the legislations intent to stir up a repeat bill. Because the issue at hand is one of waste and environmental protection, his humorous diction provides a link between he and the audience, revealing not only an opportunity to laugh, but also reinforcement of the concept that Summers is trustworthy and just like everyone else. Negative words with specifically poor connotations also aid Summers in his persuasive struggle. “Reprieve,” “dubious,” “bureaucracy,” and “evil incarnate” all depict a disparaging tone of annoyance and anger, surely helping Summers to spread his message.

It is through many rhetorical devices that Summers sells his argument. Powerful diction, qualification, ethos, pathos, logos, and informative facts all contribute to an exceptionally well-written argument. It is his utilization of these practices and more that make this article worthy of recognition. Once one reads the piece, they’ll be nodding along in accordance with Summers, and it isn’t for no reason.

# data[].field_overview.value
“Paper or plastic?” This is often a question we are asked at our weekly and/or bi-weekly trip to the supermarket to purchase groceries to keep our family fed. Adam B. Summers has created a highly plausible argument that may change your answer next time you go grocery shopping. He has developed valid claims that are backed up with crucial evidence and has been able to properly persuade the reader by appealing to logos and other rhetorical strategies.

Summers uses his words and research to reason with the reader and explain to them why plastic bags really are the correct choice. A vast majority of people are misled about all of the waste that plastic bags cause when Summers writes, “...plastic bags, sacks, and wraps of all kinds (not just grocery bags) make up only about 1.6 percent of all municipal solid waste materials.” This number is definitely lower that we all assume, going into this passage, and we are left surprised. Using reusable bags is a solution that others have come up with to attempt to create less waste, however Summers delivers an appealing argument. “...plastic bag bans lead to increased health problems due to food contamination from bacteria that remain in the reusable bags.” This excerpt creates another claim that leaves the reader wondering if reusable bags are really worth it. These past two claims are connected well because they both draw the reader back to the idea of using plastic bags. Another claim by Summers, “...one unintended consequence of the plastic bag would likely be an increase in plastic bag purchases for these other purposes.” These “other purposes” can be for lining trash bins, picking up after your dog on a walk, collecting kitty litter, and many more things we use plastic bags for. When the author brings in all of these additional uses of the plastic bag, we see the significance of the plastic bag and how much money we save by reusing them. A final claim by Summers, “The plastic bag ban would threaten the roughly 2,000 California jobs in the plastic bag manufacturing and recycling industry...” Now the reader almost feels guilty because they do not want to take away jobs of others and the fact that some people even depend on shoppers using plastic bags. These two final claims are well connected because the author stressed the economic benefits of using plastic bags. Not only are these bags saving you money, but they also are keeping some people in work. These four ideas are successfully connected and convince the reader to use plastic bags over paper bags and other types of reusable bags.

Evidence is a key component of this passage and Summers is sure to include this when presenting us with key facts. He references important agencies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and includes a professor from the University of Pennsylvania, Jonathan Klick and a professor from George Mason University, Joshua D. Wright. The inclusion of this agency and these professors make the work of Summers credible and believable because us readers are confident of what we are being told is correct and true. Evidence he also uses are facts such as, “...plastic grocery bags produce fewer greenhouse gas emissions, require 70 percent less energy to make, generate 80 percent less waste.” These facts back up Summers’ claims that plastic bags are the better choice. Without evidence, his passage would not mean a thing to us readers and we would never be able to believe what he has said.

Persuasive elements are what make this passage successful. Summers has excellent ideas and credible evince, but his use of persuasion are what capture the reader. He appeals to logos when stating all of his claims about how using plastic bags can save you money and keep you from getting sick, but he also appeals to pathos because this passage described how plastic bags amount to less waste than most of us think and he wants to help us make the Earth a better place to live. Throwing examples at us, “... San Francisco’s plastic bag ban in 2007 resulted in a subsequent spike in hospital emercgency room visits due to E. Coli, salmonella, ...” persuade the reader as well. With rhetorical strategies and direct examples, Summers is clearly able to persuade the reader to choose plastic next time.

So what will you choose next time you’re shopping for groceries with your family? Summers has made the choice obvious with his persuasive and effective passage. He has been able to develop several ideas and backed them up with evidence that us readers can trust. After reading this passage, there seems to be no other choice than plastic.

# data[].field_overview.processed
“Paper or plastic?” This is often a question we are asked at our weekly and/or bi-weekly trip to the supermarket to purchase groceries to keep our family fed. Adam B. Summers has created a highly plausible argument that may change your answer next time you go grocery shopping. He has developed valid claims that are backed up with crucial evidence and has been able to properly persuade the reader by appealing to logos and other rhetorical strategies.

Summers uses his words and research to reason with the reader and explain to them why plastic bags really are the correct choice. A vast majority of people are misled about all of the waste that plastic bags cause when Summers writes, “...plastic bags, sacks, and wraps of all kinds (not just grocery bags) make up only about 1.6 percent of all municipal solid waste materials.” This number is definitely lower that we all assume, going into this passage, and we are left surprised. Using reusable bags is a solution that others have come up with to attempt to create less waste, however Summers delivers an appealing argument. “...plastic bag bans lead to increased health problems due to food contamination from bacteria that remain in the reusable bags.” This excerpt creates another claim that leaves the reader wondering if reusable bags are really worth it. These past two claims are connected well because they both draw the reader back to the idea of using plastic bags. Another claim by Summers, “...one unintended consequence of the plastic bag would likely be an increase in plastic bag purchases for these other purposes.” These “other purposes” can be for lining trash bins, picking up after your dog on a walk, collecting kitty litter, and many more things we use plastic bags for. When the author brings in all of these additional uses of the plastic bag, we see the significance of the plastic bag and how much money we save by reusing them. A final claim by Summers, “The plastic bag ban would threaten the roughly 2,000 California jobs in the plastic bag manufacturing and recycling industry...” Now the reader almost feels guilty because they do not want to take away jobs of others and the fact that some people even depend on shoppers using plastic bags. These two final claims are well connected because the author stressed the economic benefits of using plastic bags. Not only are these bags saving you money, but they also are keeping some people in work. These four ideas are successfully connected and convince the reader to use plastic bags over paper bags and other types of reusable bags.

Evidence is a key component of this passage and Summers is sure to include this when presenting us with key facts. He references important agencies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and includes a professor from the University of Pennsylvania, Jonathan Klick and a professor from George Mason University, Joshua D. Wright. The inclusion of this agency and these professors make the work of Summers credible and believable because us readers are confident of what we are being told is correct and true. Evidence he also uses are facts such as, “...plastic grocery bags produce fewer greenhouse gas emissions, require 70 percent less energy to make, generate 80 percent less waste.” These facts back up Summers’ claims that plastic bags are the better choice. Without evidence, his passage would not mean a thing to us readers and we would never be able to believe what he has said.

Persuasive elements are what make this passage successful. Summers has excellent ideas and credible evince, but his use of persuasion are what capture the reader. He appeals to logos when stating all of his claims about how using plastic bags can save you money and keep you from getting sick, but he also appeals to pathos because this passage described how plastic bags amount to less waste than most of us think and he wants to help us make the Earth a better place to live. Throwing examples at us, “... San Francisco’s plastic bag ban in 2007 resulted in a subsequent spike in hospital emercgency room visits due to E. Coli, salmonella, ...” persuade the reader as well. With rhetorical strategies and direct examples, Summers is clearly able to persuade the reader to choose plastic next time.

So what will you choose next time you’re shopping for groceries with your family? Summers has made the choice obvious with his persuasive and effective passage. He has been able to develop several ideas and backed them up with evidence that us readers can trust. After reading this passage, there seems to be no other choice than plastic.

# data[].field_overview.value
READING — 1

This response demonstrates little comprehension of the source text. The writer fails to show an understanding of the passage’s central idea. Though the writer recognizes that Paul is a person who likes the dark and is facinated in the night skies, this is insufficient to show a grasp of the core of Bogard’s argument that artificial light should be reduced and natural darkness preserved. This lack of understanding is further shown in the statement that Bogard gives many pros and cons about the dark, as the passage does not raise any detriments of darkness. Additional attempts to describe the purpose of Bogard’s argument are equally unclear: The dark isn’t always dark there could be a little light in the dark; Rise with the sun and rise like the moon. The few references to details from the passage (Paul says that the night sky can be beautiful too. The more dark the less electric bill to pay and easier to deal with) are isolated from context and do not refer to the broader purpose of Bogard’s passage. This lack of understanding of the argument’s central idea shows the writer’s inadequate comprehension of the source text.

ANALYSIS — 1

This response displays no understanding of the analytical task. The writer makes no attempt to identify any potential persuasive elements from Bogard’s passage. The response instead is focused on attempts to relay textual details (He is facinated in the night skies; We can save energy by using the light of the day and the moon from the dark). Since the response offers no discernible analysis, it shows inadequate skill in this dimension.

WRITING — 1

This response exhibits ineffective language control and little cohesion. There is no recognizable introduction or conclusion, and the writer doesn’t provide a central claim or other organizing idea. The response has virtually no progression, as ideas are presented with little apparent connection to earlier ones: He gives many pros and cons about the dark. The dark isn’t always dark there could be a little light; Paul says that the night sky can be beautiful too. The more dark the less electric bill to pay. Sentences use short and repetitive structures and often contain errors (The more dark the less electric bill to pay and easier to deal with) or vague word choices that lack meaning (Rise with the sun and rise like the moon). This lack of structure and control of language demonstrates ineffective writing skill.

# data[].field_overview.processed
READING — 1

This response demonstrates little comprehension of the source text. The writer fails to show an understanding of the passage’s central idea. Though the writer recognizes that Paul is a person who likes the dark and is facinated in the night skies, this is insufficient to show a grasp of the core of Bogard’s argument that artificial light should be reduced and natural darkness preserved. This lack of understanding is further shown in the statement that Bogard gives many pros and cons about the dark, as the passage does not raise any detriments of darkness. Additional attempts to describe the purpose of Bogard’s argument are equally unclear: The dark isn’t always dark there could be a little light in the dark; Rise with the sun and rise like the moon. The few references to details from the passage (Paul says that the night sky can be beautiful too. The more dark the less electric bill to pay and easier to deal with) are isolated from context and do not refer to the broader purpose of Bogard’s passage. This lack of understanding of the argument’s central idea shows the writer’s inadequate comprehension of the source text.

ANALYSIS — 1

This response displays no understanding of the analytical task. The writer makes no attempt to identify any potential persuasive elements from Bogard’s passage. The response instead is focused on attempts to relay textual details (He is facinated in the night skies; We can save energy by using the light of the day and the moon from the dark). Since the response offers no discernible analysis, it shows inadequate skill in this dimension.

WRITING — 1

This response exhibits ineffective language control and little cohesion. There is no recognizable introduction or conclusion, and the writer doesn’t provide a central claim or other organizing idea. The response has virtually no progression, as ideas are presented with little apparent connection to earlier ones: He gives many pros and cons about the dark. The dark isn’t always dark there could be a little light; Paul says that the night sky can be beautiful too. The more dark the less electric bill to pay. Sentences use short and repetitive structures and often contain errors (The more dark the less electric bill to pay and easier to deal with) or vague word choices that lack meaning (Rise with the sun and rise like the moon). This lack of structure and control of language demonstrates ineffective writing skill.

# data[].field_overview.value
READING — 2

This response demonstrates some comprehension of Bogard’s text. Although this essay consists almost entirely of two quotations taken directly from the passage, the writer has demonstrated an understanding of two of Bogard’s central points: that darkness is crucial to humans and animals. This understanding is displayed by the writer’s selection of two important lines of the source text and the brief evidence the writer shows of being able to summarize the main idea of these quotations. However, the writer demonstrates no other understanding of the passage beyond the ability to quote these two main ideas, leading to a demonstration of only partial understanding of the source text.

ANALYSIS — 1

The writer demonstrates no understanding of the analytical task. The writer does not attempt to analyze Bogard’s use of evidence, reasoning, or stylistic or persuasive elements. Instead, the writer cites two sentences from the passage and then offers a brief restatement of each point. With no analysis, the response scores a 1.

WRITING — 1

This essay demonstrates little cohesion and inadequate skill in the use and control of language. The essay begins with a very broad central claim In “Let there Be dark,” Paul Bogard talks about the importance of darknessbut otherwise lacks a recognizable introduction and conclusion. The writer’s two main ideas are separated into two separate paragraphs, but because there is little original writing here, there is no clear evidence of the ability to logically order or develop ideas. There is also little evidence of the writer’s ability to vary sentence structures. Overall, this essay does not provide enough evidence of writing ability to warrant a score higher than a 1.

# data[].field_overview.processed
READING — 2

This response demonstrates some comprehension of Bogard’s text. Although this essay consists almost entirely of two quotations taken directly from the passage, the writer has demonstrated an understanding of two of Bogard’s central points: that darkness is crucial to humans and animals. This understanding is displayed by the writer’s selection of two important lines of the source text and the brief evidence the writer shows of being able to summarize the main idea of these quotations. However, the writer demonstrates no other understanding of the passage beyond the ability to quote these two main ideas, leading to a demonstration of only partial understanding of the source text.

ANALYSIS — 1

The writer demonstrates no understanding of the analytical task. The writer does not attempt to analyze Bogard’s use of evidence, reasoning, or stylistic or persuasive elements. Instead, the writer cites two sentences from the passage and then offers a brief restatement of each point. With no analysis, the response scores a 1.

WRITING — 1

This essay demonstrates little cohesion and inadequate skill in the use and control of language. The essay begins with a very broad central claim In “Let there Be dark,” Paul Bogard talks about the importance of darknessbut otherwise lacks a recognizable introduction and conclusion. The writer’s two main ideas are separated into two separate paragraphs, but because there is little original writing here, there is no clear evidence of the ability to logically order or develop ideas. There is also little evidence of the writer’s ability to vary sentence structures. Overall, this essay does not provide enough evidence of writing ability to warrant a score higher than a 1.

# data[].field_overview.value
READING — 2

This response demonstrates some understanding of the source text. The writer captures Bogard’s central idea by repeating the prompt’s summary statement about the importance of preserving natural darkness and includes a few details from the source text that support this central idea. The writer references the fact that many species depend on the darkness, that are bodies need darkness to produce many different hormones, that different religious tradition that vaule darkness, and that Bogard compares how cities and towns across the world are changing thier ways of light. However, despite citing these details, whenever the writer moves beyond language taken directly from the passage and attempts to summarize a point Bogard has made, the interpretation is often unclear or inaccurate (Darkness tends to evolve all over the world for a variety of things; In Bogard’s essay he provides information about technologies that are determining different light fixtures). Overall, therefore, this essay demonstrates only limited comprehension of Bogard’s argument.

ANALYSIS — 1

This writer has an ineffective understanding of the analytical task. The writer identifies Bogard’s use of touch, feeling, seeing or even our own senses as aspects that build Bogard’s argument. However, the writer is unable to express how Bogard uses these elements specifically. For example, in the first body paragraph, the writer claims that One of the senses Bogard uses within his essay is touch, but none of the ensuing discussion in this paragraph relates to touch at all. Instead, the writer merely goes on to summarize that Bogard concludes that many species depend on the darkness. In the ensuing paragraph, the writer tries to address Bogard’s use of feeling, but again, the discussion does not clearly explain how the examples cited from the source text relate to “feeling.” In the fourth paragraph, the writer is on the right track by identifying that Bogard uses emotion to build his argument, but the writer doesn’t extend beyond identification: I think that this topic Bogard uses appeals to emotion to many different religious groups. Giving evidence of a historical artist Van Gogh adds a lot of emotion to this particular essay. The writer merely identifies these as appeals to emotion but doesn’t try to explain the effect these examples have on readers’ emotions—how they might be used to influence readers or otherwise build Bogard’s argument. All this demonstrates little analysis of the source text.

WRITING — 2

This response demonstrates limited cohesion and skill in the use and control of language. The writer has provided a skeletal organizational structure for the essay, with a brief introduction that sets up the writer’s central claim and a standard six-paragraph format that roughly follows the order of the points the writer intends to discuss: Bogard uses many features such as touch, feeling, seeing or even our own senses. However, the essay lacks a progression of ideas within paragraphs; instead, ideas are disconnected from one another, so although the essay has the appearance of being ordered into logical paragraphs, the actual content of those paragraphs does not demonstrate cohesion. In many instances, in fact, the writer has separated a single idea into separate sentence/fragment combinations that give the illusion of more robust paragraphs than actually exist (for example, the entirety of the fifth paragraph: In Bogard’s essay he provides information about technologies that are determining different light fixtures. Comparing how cities and towns across the world are changing thier ways of light is going to be wasted). In this essay, organization and language errors detract from the quality of the writing and often impede understanding, demonstrating limited writing skill.

# data[].field_overview.processed
READING — 2

This response demonstrates some understanding of the source text. The writer captures Bogard’s central idea by repeating the prompt’s summary statement about the importance of preserving natural darkness and includes a few details from the source text that support this central idea. The writer references the fact that many species depend on the darkness, that are bodies need darkness to produce many different hormones, that different religious tradition that vaule darkness, and that Bogard compares how cities and towns across the world are changing thier ways of light. However, despite citing these details, whenever the writer moves beyond language taken directly from the passage and attempts to summarize a point Bogard has made, the interpretation is often unclear or inaccurate (Darkness tends to evolve all over the world for a variety of things; In Bogard’s essay he provides information about technologies that are determining different light fixtures). Overall, therefore, this essay demonstrates only limited comprehension of Bogard’s argument.

ANALYSIS — 1

This writer has an ineffective understanding of the analytical task. The writer identifies Bogard’s use of touch, feeling, seeing or even our own senses as aspects that build Bogard’s argument. However, the writer is unable to express how Bogard uses these elements specifically. For example, in the first body paragraph, the writer claims that One of the senses Bogard uses within his essay is touch, but none of the ensuing discussion in this paragraph relates to touch at all. Instead, the writer merely goes on to summarize that Bogard concludes that many species depend on the darkness. In the ensuing paragraph, the writer tries to address Bogard’s use of feeling, but again, the discussion does not clearly explain how the examples cited from the source text relate to “feeling.” In the fourth paragraph, the writer is on the right track by identifying that Bogard uses emotion to build his argument, but the writer doesn’t extend beyond identification: I think that this topic Bogard uses appeals to emotion to many different religious groups. Giving evidence of a historical artist Van Gogh adds a lot of emotion to this particular essay. The writer merely identifies these as appeals to emotion but doesn’t try to explain the effect these examples have on readers’ emotions—how they might be used to influence readers or otherwise build Bogard’s argument. All this demonstrates little analysis of the source text.

WRITING — 2

This response demonstrates limited cohesion and skill in the use and control of language. The writer has provided a skeletal organizational structure for the essay, with a brief introduction that sets up the writer’s central claim and a standard six-paragraph format that roughly follows the order of the points the writer intends to discuss: Bogard uses many features such as touch, feeling, seeing or even our own senses. However, the essay lacks a progression of ideas within paragraphs; instead, ideas are disconnected from one another, so although the essay has the appearance of being ordered into logical paragraphs, the actual content of those paragraphs does not demonstrate cohesion. In many instances, in fact, the writer has separated a single idea into separate sentence/fragment combinations that give the illusion of more robust paragraphs than actually exist (for example, the entirety of the fifth paragraph: In Bogard’s essay he provides information about technologies that are determining different light fixtures. Comparing how cities and towns across the world are changing thier ways of light is going to be wasted). In this essay, organization and language errors detract from the quality of the writing and often impede understanding, demonstrating limited writing skill.

# data[].field_overview.value
READING — 2

This writer demonstrates some comprehension of the passage. In the first paragraph, the writer conveys the passage’s broad central idea—that Bogard emphasizes the importance of natural darkness—and discusses Bogard’s comparison of his personal past to society’s present use of light. Here, the writer offers an interpretation of one of the author’s points: [Bogard implies] that the times have definitely changed and natural darkness’s value has been lost in society, replaced with artificial light. In the following paragraph, the writer continues by briefly citing Bogard’s point about the negative health implications of too much natural light. However, this is the last evidence of understanding the writer provides. The essay ends almost immediately after, and with this limited coverage of textual details, the writer demonstrates only partial understanding of the source text.

ANALYSIS — 2

The response offers some, but limited, analysis, demonstrating only partial understanding of the analytical task. The writer identifies Bogard’s use of imagery in the story of meteors in the night sky and then asserts that this imagery appeals to the reader but offers no further discussion of Bogard’s use of imagery and how it contributes to his argument. The writer also references the comparison Bogard makes between his youth and now and says that the comparison gives Bogard a sense of voice but doesn’t explain why this comparison contributes to Bogard’s voice or how establishing a particular voice works for Bogard’s argument. The writer offers one additional point of analysis, asserting that Bogard’s reference to cancer is a quick attention grabber and claims that the use of a fact relating to the reader is the best persuasion, especially when it relates to there health or well-being. However, the writer does not elaborate on this point further or attempt to explain why bringing up health is an effective tactic. In each instance of analysis in this response, the writer identifies the use of evidence or rhetorical features but asserts rather than explains their importance.

WRITING — 2

This response demonstrates limited cohesion and only some skill in the use of language. Although a controlling idea can be found in the topic sentences of the two paragraphs (Bogard begins his argument by first providing a story; Bogard supports his claims... by providing the reader with evidence), there is no indication of an introduction or conclusion to frame ideas or any other organizing structure to indicate consistent development. Overall, sentences are clear and there are no problematic issues with conventions of standard written English. However, by the end of this short response, the writer has deviated from a formal style and objective tone: Oh, no! Not cancer! Right there is a quick attention grabber to any reader previously bored by Bogard’s constant opinions. The essay concludes with a rhetorical question that also strays from a formal tone: Cancer, because who wants a terminal illness over an action as simple as flipping a switch on a night light when it’s too dark for your comfort? On the whole, therefore, this response shows only partial evidence of cohesion and control of language.

# data[].field_overview.processed
READING — 2

This writer demonstrates some comprehension of the passage. In the first paragraph, the writer conveys the passage’s broad central idea—that Bogard emphasizes the importance of natural darkness—and discusses Bogard’s comparison of his personal past to society’s present use of light. Here, the writer offers an interpretation of one of the author’s points: [Bogard implies] that the times have definitely changed and natural darkness’s value has been lost in society, replaced with artificial light. In the following paragraph, the writer continues by briefly citing Bogard’s point about the negative health implications of too much natural light. However, this is the last evidence of understanding the writer provides. The essay ends almost immediately after, and with this limited coverage of textual details, the writer demonstrates only partial understanding of the source text.

ANALYSIS — 2

The response offers some, but limited, analysis, demonstrating only partial understanding of the analytical task. The writer identifies Bogard’s use of imagery in the story of meteors in the night sky and then asserts that this imagery appeals to the reader but offers no further discussion of Bogard’s use of imagery and how it contributes to his argument. The writer also references the comparison Bogard makes between his youth and now and says that the comparison gives Bogard a sense of voice but doesn’t explain why this comparison contributes to Bogard’s voice or how establishing a particular voice works for Bogard’s argument. The writer offers one additional point of analysis, asserting that Bogard’s reference to cancer is a quick attention grabber and claims that the use of a fact relating to the reader is the best persuasion, especially when it relates to there health or well-being. However, the writer does not elaborate on this point further or attempt to explain why bringing up health is an effective tactic. In each instance of analysis in this response, the writer identifies the use of evidence or rhetorical features but asserts rather than explains their importance.

WRITING — 2

This response demonstrates limited cohesion and only some skill in the use of language. Although a controlling idea can be found in the topic sentences of the two paragraphs (Bogard begins his argument by first providing a story; Bogard supports his claims... by providing the reader with evidence), there is no indication of an introduction or conclusion to frame ideas or any other organizing structure to indicate consistent development. Overall, sentences are clear and there are no problematic issues with conventions of standard written English. However, by the end of this short response, the writer has deviated from a formal style and objective tone: Oh, no! Not cancer! Right there is a quick attention grabber to any reader previously bored by Bogard’s constant opinions. The essay concludes with a rhetorical question that also strays from a formal tone: Cancer, because who wants a terminal illness over an action as simple as flipping a switch on a night light when it’s too dark for your comfort? On the whole, therefore, this response shows only partial evidence of cohesion and control of language.

# data[].field_overview.value
READING — 3

The writer shows proficient comprehension of Bogard’s argument. The introduction presents the passage’s central idea (He explains and persuades that natural darkness should be preserved) and begins describing the important details used in its support: a statistic about children born in the United States and how their experiences with a true dark night are different from when he was a child. The writer continues to bring up Bogard’s main points, addressing the increase in like cell phones when we go to bed and the health risks such as diabetes, obesity, and depression related to poor sleep; the fact that So many different species rely on darkness to live that our “Ecological light pollution is like a bulldozer of the night”; that while in the 1950’s compared to now, the United states was really dark and now it’s bright and lit up all the time; and that Bogard suggests we can go to what Europe has done to shrink artificial light use by changing streetlights and reducing lighting hours. This coverage of the source text’s key points, through competent paraphrase and quotations, demonstrates the writer’s effective understanding of the passage.

ANALYSIS — 1

This response offers no analysis of Bogard’s argument. Rather than identifying elements from the source text that are persuasive and attempting to describe their importance, the writer merely summarizes the information that Bogard provides in the passage. This can be seen in the way the response recounts points from the source text (He says that humans need darkness; He says that humans have too much artificial light; even though our world is on-going and at such a fast pace, we can still provide “solitude, quiet and stillness”; He talks about how our nights are growing brighter) without discussing any aspect of what persuasive effect they might have. Because the response is exclusively summary and does not attempt to evaluate the persuasiveness of Bogard’s argument, it displays an inadequate understanding of the analytical task.

WRITING — 3

This mostly cohesive response demonstrates proficient use and control of language. While the introduction does not offer a central claim and instead launches directly into discussion of Bogard’s points, the response does follow an implicit controlling idea as the writer addresses these points in the order in which they appear in the passage. This creates a clear progression of ideas as the writer moves from Bogard’s personal anecdote to the health effects of artificial light on humans and animals, to the loss of sights like Van Gogh’s “Starry Night” in a brightening world, and then to Bogard’s suggested solutions. The writer’s sentences are clear and free of significant errors, though a few use a slightly repetitive structure (He says that humans need darkness; He says that humans have too much artificial light; He talks about our nights). As a whole, the response displays the writer’s effective use of language.

# data[].field_overview.processed
READING — 3

The writer shows proficient comprehension of Bogard’s argument. The introduction presents the passage’s central idea (He explains and persuades that natural darkness should be preserved) and begins describing the important details used in its support: a statistic about children born in the United States and how their experiences with a true dark night are different from when he was a child. The writer continues to bring up Bogard’s main points, addressing the increase in like cell phones when we go to bed and the health risks such as diabetes, obesity, and depression related to poor sleep; the fact that So many different species rely on darkness to live that our “Ecological light pollution is like a bulldozer of the night”; that while in the 1950’s compared to now, the United states was really dark and now it’s bright and lit up all the time; and that Bogard suggests we can go to what Europe has done to shrink artificial light use by changing streetlights and reducing lighting hours. This coverage of the source text’s key points, through competent paraphrase and quotations, demonstrates the writer’s effective understanding of the passage.

ANALYSIS — 1

This response offers no analysis of Bogard’s argument. Rather than identifying elements from the source text that are persuasive and attempting to describe their importance, the writer merely summarizes the information that Bogard provides in the passage. This can be seen in the way the response recounts points from the source text (He says that humans need darkness; He says that humans have too much artificial light; even though our world is on-going and at such a fast pace, we can still provide “solitude, quiet and stillness”; He talks about how our nights are growing brighter) without discussing any aspect of what persuasive effect they might have. Because the response is exclusively summary and does not attempt to evaluate the persuasiveness of Bogard’s argument, it displays an inadequate understanding of the analytical task.

WRITING — 3

This mostly cohesive response demonstrates proficient use and control of language. While the introduction does not offer a central claim and instead launches directly into discussion of Bogard’s points, the response does follow an implicit controlling idea as the writer addresses these points in the order in which they appear in the passage. This creates a clear progression of ideas as the writer moves from Bogard’s personal anecdote to the health effects of artificial light on humans and animals, to the loss of sights like Van Gogh’s “Starry Night” in a brightening world, and then to Bogard’s suggested solutions. The writer’s sentences are clear and free of significant errors, though a few use a slightly repetitive structure (He says that humans need darkness; He says that humans have too much artificial light; He talks about our nights). As a whole, the response displays the writer’s effective use of language.