rovide Concrete Examples: Avoid Generalizations: Students often speak in generalizations.  In other words, when given a task, I have found as a seasoned educator that students would rather repeat the same idea rather than add depth by adding a solid example.  Building your argument with solid, tangible evidence is essential for a big score.  Recently, I asked some students to evaluate a Vince Lombardi quote, emphasizing the greatness of one who earns first place and the failure of one who earns second place.  Lombardi’s claim is controversial, so I wanted students to take a stand, developing their position with various examples.  In fact, the College Board wants you to use examples from history, literature, current events, personal experiences, etc.  We will discuss the development of a universal arsenal, a toolbox for all occasions, during a later discussion.  Here is an awful example of the writing prompt, one that uses wandering, discursive insights that point to nothing solid for development:

Most top coaches would agree with the quote.  “The object is to win-to beat the other guy.  Maybe that sounds hard or cruel.  I don’t think it is”.  Through my water polo career all my coaches would agree with this quote, the objective of the game is to win it doesn’t matter what it takes.  This means sometimes one has to play unsportsmanlike and execute whatever it takes to win, one cannot give their opponent any mercy.

It is obvious that the example above show little to no effort with providing a concrete example.  Although the author does use incidents from his personal experience such as “water polo career” and “coaches,” the SAT writer fails to develop any concept at a further depth.  Though there are many problems with the writer’s grammar and organization, his/her greatest ill is the complete lack of development.  There is no muscle here- essentially these words are the equivalent of a weakling who gets sand kicked in his face.  The words offer no reason for respect and the grader will give a score accordingly.  The writer could have developed his personal experience by underscoring his coaches need to win and the positive consequences of this win- perhaps a state championship, an unforgettable win, a place in history!  However, if a writer does choose a personal experience, it must be energetic and insightful.  I call the use of personal experiences the I-have-a-friend-of-a-friend technique.  Though one may not be scored lower simply for choosing this approach, given the holistic grading scale, the example must be special enough to avoid falling into the pits of cliché. Looking back at the example, the writer’s example falls in the first round- it doesn’t even put up a fight.  An unwritten law in the SAT essay, when shooting for the 5 or 6, is to use examples that showcase the extent of your education.  I agree that a personal experience may do this- but the experience must be insightful enough, tapping into the real essence of human experience to wow the grader.  A more practical approach for the wow factor is to use scholastic examples that add what we might call academic muscle to your essay; it certainly is the safe play for bigger points.  Take the same question answered by a student who uses a concrete example:

Second, winning is important, but knowing how to lose is just as important since losing teaches a more valuable lesson that may lead an athlete to success later in his or her life.  For example, the greatest basketball player, Michael Jordan, was cut from his high school basketball team, but he did not quit and came out more determined than ever, eventually becoming of the NBA’s legendary players. 

In this example, the student continued his insights by offering a few more examples that illustrated the learning experience that stems from losing.  He continued with this great historical example of a country that was defeated in a few battles, only to emerge as a smarter, stronger power when they recuperated from their defeat.  At every move, the SAT writer provided concrete examples to defend his idea that losing often has positive outcomes in the long run.