Common Mistakes on Q3 of the AP Lang Exam | How to Write an Argument | Coach Hall Writes

Summary

Highlights

• Specific evidence is crucial for scoring well; many students fail to include it, resulting in lower scores. 📝
• Essays with clear, connected commentary score higher, emphasizing the need for consistency. 🔗
• Strong authorial voice can make essays standout, but without enough commentary, scores might suffer. 🌟
• Writing about familiar topics can be persuasive and effective if backed with solid evidence. 💪
• A concession and refutation structure adds depth and shows strong analytical skills. ⚖️

Key Takeaways

• Specific evidence is the key to scoring high on the AP Lang Exam! 📚
• Avoid generalizations - dig deeper with your evidence! 🔍
• Connect the dots with clear and consistent commentary! 🎯
• A strong voice enhances essays, but don't skimp on commentary. 🎤
• Concession and refutation are crucial for well-rounded arguments! 🤔

Overview

Chapters

• 00:00 - 01:30: Introduction and Importance of Specific Evidence In this chapter, the focus is on common mistakes students make on question three of the AP Language exam. The author attended a conference where they evaluated numerous essays based on the 2019 prompt and 2020 rubric. They aim to provide valuable tips and advice to help students succeed in the 2020 exam. The primary advice emphasized is to avoid certain key mistakes.
• 01:30 - 03:00: Writing Styles and Evidence Types The chapter discusses the importance of using specific evidence in writing, particularly in essays. It highlights that many students struggle with understanding what constitutes specific evidence, which can significantly affect their scores according to the new rubric. Generalizations or insufficient specific evidence can result in low scores, such as a 1 or 2. The chapter also examines various writing styles that result in either generalizations or the inclusion of specific evidence, although the examples provided are not complete paragraphs or essays.
• 03:00 - 04:30: Scoring Criteria and Commentary This chapter focuses on scoring criteria for essays, emphasizing the importance of providing concrete evidence to support claims. It critiques a representative style of writing where generalizations and personal opinions are made without factual support, often resulting in essays that feel more like rants. The chapter highlights that while some essays show promise due to the presence of a clear claim, they fall short because they lack in-depth exploration and substantiation with evidence. This underscores the need for students to dig deeper to strengthen their arguments.
• 04:30 - 06:00: Voice and Topic Choice in Essays The chapter discusses how providing specific examples in essays can elevate the quality of writing from an average score to a higher one, such as from a two to a three or four. The importance of using detailed examples, like mentioning specific countries or states such as Arkansas, is highlighted to illustrate points and improve the overall commentary in essays.
• 06:00 - 09:00: Concession and Refutation in Arguments This chapter discusses the technique of concession and refutation in arguments, emphasizing the use of specific evidence. The concept is illustrated using a reference to Finland, highlighting the importance of precise examples for effective compare and contrast in rhetorical analysis. The discussion also touches on the criteria for scoring essays, specifically the difference between scores on a particular rubric, and reflects on common mistakes that can lead to lower scores.
• 09:00 - 11:30: Line of Reasoning and Planning The chapter discusses the importance of including specific evidence, a clear line of reasoning, and coherent commentary in essay writing. It explains that essays that scored an 'A3' had specific evidence but often lacked consistent commentary to connect that evidence back to the thesis. In contrast, essays scoring an 'A4' typically had stronger commentary that effectively tied the evidence back to the main argument, demonstrating a more comprehensive understanding and explanation.
• 11:30 - 12:30: Conclusion and Further Resources The conclusion chapter emphasizes the importance of having consistent evidence and commentary to support claims in an essay. A high-scoring essay should be well-executed with multiple claims backed by evidence and thorough commentary. The chapter reflects on an example of a well-written essay that fell short due to insufficient commentary, highlighting the significance of this component in achieving the highest marks.

Common Mistakes on Q3 of the AP Lang Exam | How to Write an Argument | Coach Hall Writes Transcription

• 00:00 - 00:30 hey guys welcome back to coach all rights in today's video we're gonna be looking at common mistakes that students make on question three of the AP lang exam recently I went to a conference in which I scored close to a hundred essays of the overrated prompt from 2019 but based on the 20/20 rubric and let me tell you it was an eye-opening experience so this video has all my tips that I'm gonna be giving to my own students to help them be more successful on the 20/20 exam so the biggest piece of advice I have for students is to make
• 00:30 - 01:00 sure you have specific evidence I don't think a lot of students who wrote these essays truly understood what specific evidence was it's something that I'm gonna be hammering into my own students between now and May as well because it's absolutely crucial based on the new rubric so if you have generalizations or only some specific evidence you're gonna get either a 1 or a 2 and Roby so let's look at some of the writing styles that warrant either a generalization or some specific evidence so keep in mind that the examples I'm gonna show you are not full paragraphs let alone an essay it's
• 01:00 - 01:30 just representative of the style so here we basically just have a claim there's no facts no evidence to prove this it's just a generalization so it comes across as an opinion we saw a lot of essays that came across as a rant in the generalization type style now this one is very indicative of the essays that were close they just needed to dig deeper and part of the reason I say that is because the student clearly has an idea here they have a claim that they try to support but they just don't give concrete evidence and so it says other
• 01:30 - 02:00 countries here if we had a specific example of another country and really developed that example that would be what it took to improve that to a three instead of a two in my opinion now again it's just a simple sample of the type of writing this one is what I believe would warrant a three possibly afford depending on the level of commentary but notice it's already longer than the previous example and we see two specific examples in this one first we see a reference to Arkansas so we see a specific example about what testing is
• 02:00 - 02:30 like in that state and then we see a reference to Finland so instead of saying other countries we already have an exact country that we're talking about here and we see this mode of compare and contrast so this is important because some of the modes that you study for rhetorical analysis are modes that you can use in your own writing and so this hinges on specific evidence so what's the difference between a 3 out of 4 and a 4 out of 4 in row B well here's the thing I actually saw a couple essays that unfortunately got it too and it's not because they
• 02:30 - 03:00 didn't have good commentary they actually did the problem was they didn't have specific evidence so that's the thing that students really need to understand is that a3 and a4 both have specific evidence they have detail they have a line of reasoning now once you have that specific evidence then we look at the commentary and essays that scored a3 tended to have a bit more inconsistent commentary so they might have evidence but they might not have commentary to really back it up and connect it back to the thesis to really explain it whereas a4 tended to have very
• 03:00 - 03:30 consistent evidence in commentary to support all of the claims in the essay so that was the difference it was just the level of execution and consistency of the commentary so if you're striving for a4 you've really got to think of the scope of your essay you need to think about having multiple claims with evidence and commentary so let's talk about that commentary for a second because there was one essay that really stood out to me as being very well-written but it just didn't have enough commentary to warrant a 4 out of 4 in row B so this particular essay was
• 03:30 - 04:00 actually about a basketball player and the student had an amazing authorial voice this is where when students play to their strengths you can really tell this student knew all about this players stats it was very convincing and it was written in a way in terms of style where somebody like me who doesn't really follow a professional basketball could still understand however there were a few sentences throughout where after we had all this evidence the commentary was just very limited things like this is
• 04:00 - 04:30 absurd and quite frankly I understood why it was absurd but I had to think about it a little bit too much you need to connect the dots for your reader if the student had said something like this is absurd because and had just continued that line of reasoning with that commentary a little bit more I would have felt more confident about giving it a 4 but I loved the voice and so that's something that I think students need to understand too is that we don't always need you to choose the these highly sophisticated topics sometimes it's much more convincing and
• 04:30 - 05:00 much more persuasive if you choose something you know because then you have a strong voice and so this was a classic example of it where the student had a strong voice they were able to provide very accurate facts I trusted the student the essay read like something that would be in like ESPN magazine or something it was just that good however it was a bit too limited on the commentary to warrant a four out of four that basketball essay was one that really stood out to me so much so that I gave it to one of the other readers at my table to read because I really
• 05:00 - 05:30 enjoyed it and then another reader at my table gave me one to read about rollerskating because she thought it was really good and then as we were talking about the essays we heard other essays that stood out from other tables one was about broccoli one was about travel mugs one was about amusement parks so notice that at no point here did I mention things like the electoral college now that's not to say that an essay about that is bad because it's absolutely not in fact I read one that was amazing about that very topic however I think sometimes students think that they need
• 05:30 - 06:00 to write about these super intelligent concepts and if you can do it absolutely go for it but let's be honest not everybody has taken american government not everybody can write about the electoral college and how it's overrated or maybe you don't even think it is so sometimes you just gotta play to your strengths and if you are more convincing if you're writing about travel softball then write about travel softball but have evidence and commentary if it boils down to evidence in commentary then it doesn't necessarily matter which topic
• 06:00 - 06:30 you choose as long as you actually follow the tasks on the rubric itself so hopefully that gives some of you a peace of mind because a lot of the essays that stood out to us or ones that were a breath of fresh air because the student did what they needed to do and they did it well because it was in their wheelhouse another crucial skill that students need to work on is setting up a developed concession and refutation and that's because quite frankly a lot of the essays that I read that did not have one seem to be a bit narrow-minded and seemed to have loopholes in their line
• 06:30 - 07:00 of reasoning and that set up a faulty line of reasoning which equates to a two out of four and evidence and commentary so a concession is basically when you ignore that the other side has merit and then you refute it by asserting your own position and so some students did this by doing it in the form of a single sentence which was refreshing to see in some sense however I think students need to understand that they can actually develop this into a full paragraph some students did this as their first body paragraph others did it as their last body paragraph but those arguments
• 07:00 - 07:30 tended to be much more well developed than a single sentence so what I think students need to realize with the overrated prompt is that if it's overrated it means lots of other people like it so you need to acknowledge the merit of that topic before refuting it so let's look at some examples of how we can do that here so we're gonna continue with this idea of standardized testing and so we need to acknowledge the benefits of standardized testing and so we've done that here you can see it says that it provides Norman so it measures students
• 07:30 - 08:00 abilities it can be beneficial so all these words suggest that there is merit to standardized testing then we're gonna see a switch because it says however so that indicates that we're about to refute it now this doesn't have to just be a concession and refutation done one time you can actually continue with this and have it be a multi-step process the previous slide acknowledged that while standardized tests have merit they actually cause too much stress for students and that's why they're overrated so that's our claim but now we need to prove it and so one way to do
• 08:00 - 08:30 that is to actually set up a concession and refutation so we're gonna focus in on one type of stress and that is going to be the financial stress so you'll see that we have the word yes here that indicates a concession and then we have the word but which indicates a refutation and so notice that it's a very systematic approach here we're anticipating an argument that someone would have against our claim and then we're refuting that and so it's a very layered approach here so this is how you develop a line of reasoning now that we have in this case a layered concession
• 08:30 - 09:00 and refutation we need to make sure that we have specific evidence in this paragraph in order to set ourselves up for the potential of either a three or a four and evidence in commentary and so to do that we need specific evidence so one thing I would like students to remember is that generally speaking it is better to include evidence from current events or history if possible but you can also include personal experience of hypotheticals because those are gonna come across as generalizations so if you can name a specific college that doesn't take test scores that would be something
• 09:00 - 09:30 to bring up or if you have personal experience in this matter that could be something to develop this as well but make sure you have specific evidence I've mentioned the phrase line of reasoning a few times in this video and so I want to take a second to try to explain what it means in terms of question three and so one of the best ways to describe it that I've heard so far is a monkey is walking and he picks up a banana he keeps walking and he picks up a banana he keeps walking and he picks up a watermelon and that's where the story kind of ended and the idea is that you would expect him to pick up a banana but he picks up a
• 09:30 - 10:00 watermelon so it's a bad line of reasoning and so I was thinking about this story and I was like well wait a minute what if he's grocery shopping then he could pick up a watermelon well that wasn't specified well why would a monkey be grocery shopping what if it's Curious George and the man in the yellow hat well then it would make more sense but that wasn't conveyed to the reader so a line of reasoning means that it has to be logical and it has to be coherent you have to connect all the dots for your reader that's why that particular story about Russell Westbrook was not a perfect score for me because there were
• 10:00 - 10:30 certain things that I had to infer and as a reader on the exam I can't do that and so one of the things that I think students struggled with in certain instances on cue three is that the examples they chose were not very clearly related I read one essay in particular where a student started out by talking about Columbus and I was like oh man I wish I had thought of Columbus that's a great idea but Columbus was one body paragraph the other body paragraphs talked about different things and by the
• 10:30 - 11:00 time I finished the essay we were so far away from Columbus that I wasn't sure why we even started with Columbus and so that was simply just a student who didn't have a clear line of reasoning it's not that the student didn't have good ideas it's that the ideas weren't connected for the reader and so that's something I think we need to think about a little bit more as we plan one of those tips that I have because I did actually try to write these essays with my students I did a video on this if you guys are curious I'll link it above is planning these essays out in advance
• 11:00 - 11:30 really truly can help because you can establish your line of reasoning before you actually start writing your honestly guys I know it can be a bit intimidating to be the first cohort to use these new rubrics in 2020 but I've got you covered because in the coming months I'm gonna be uploading weekly videos in order to help you prepare for the AP legging exam including a cram for the exam series and the month leading up to the test so make sure you're subscribed and until next time guys happy writing