SAT写作官方样题高分范文：Let there be dark（6）

北京sat培训,sat备考资料,sat网课,sat培训机构,sat保分班,sat真题

本文给大家分享SAT写作样题“Let there be dark”的一篇范文，本文得分4 1 3，作文题目及更多分数段范文，请点击入口。

本话题各分数段范文汇总及解读，请点击进入

Sample Student Essays of“Let There Be Dark.” ©2012 by Los Angeles Times. Originally published December 21, 2012.

Scores: 4 1 3

Paul Bogard strongly believes that natural darkness should be preserved. In

order to prove the need for natural darkness, Bogard divides his argument into

three main topics, saying that natural darkness is beneficial to humans,

essential to humans, and essential to ecosystems.

According to Bogard, natural darkness can be a positive help to humans. One

of the ways it can accomplish this is by giving enjoyment to onlookers. To

supplant this, Bogard gives a personal example of how he enjoyed seeing meteors

dart across the night sky in Minnesota as a child. Also he states that natural

darkness can be a source of solitude. Supporting this claim, Bogard states that

darkness is invaluable to every religion. Additionally Bogard says that the

night sky has inspired countless numbers of philosophers, artists, and

stargazers for millennia. He then gives an appealing allusion by asking how Van

Gogh could have painted “Starry Night” in the mist of electric light. One of

Bogard’s primary arguments for natural darkness shows how it can benefit

humans.

Bogard then gives a scientific case that shows why natural darkness is

essential to humans. He states a find of the World Health Organization that

declares the night shift can be detrimental to one’s health. He points to the

necessity of darkness in producing melatonin, a hormone that helps prevent

certain cancers from developing in the human body. Bogard then concludes his

argument that darkness is essential to human well-being by analyzing sleep. He

first makes the obvious claim that darkness is essential for sleep. Then, he

talks about the negative health effects of sleep disorders.; these include

“diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular disease and depression.” To associate this

with his argument for natural darkness, Bogard states the findings of recent

research, which say that “long light” is one of the primary causes of “short

sleep.” Bogard uses scientific evidence to support his belief in the

preservation of natural darkness.

Bogard’s third primary defense of natural darkness declares that it is

essential to nature. He notes that there are a variety of nocturnal and

crepuscular species of birds, fish, mammals, insects, and reptiles worldwide. He

gives two specific, well-known examples of these species; these discussed the

400 species of North American birds that migrate at night and the sea turtles

that lay their eggs on the shore at night. He also gives a couple of

lesser-known examples, involving bats and moths that show the positive actions

that some nocturnal animals perform. He then concludes his argument for

nocturnal darkness necessary to nature with persuasion, saying that removing

natural darkness would essentially destroy an ecology that took billions of

years to develop. Here, Bogard uses scientific fact to prove that natural

darkness is a key to nature and ecology. Paul Bogard supports the preservation

of natural darkness. He uses an argument to support his position that has three

primary points—benefit to humans, need for humans and need for nature.

This response scored a 4/1/3.

Reading—4: This response demonstrates thorough comprehension of Bogard’s text

and a clear understanding of the interrelation between the central idea and

important details. The writer briefly summarizes Bogard’s central idea (natural

darkness should be preserved) and aptly notes that Bogard’s argument encompasses

three main points: that natural darkness is beneficial to humans, essential to

humans, and essential to ecosystems. The writer provides various details from

the text that support these points. In the first body paragraph, for example,

the writer demonstrates comprehension of how Bogard’spersonal example of how he

enjoyed seeing meteors dart across the night sky in Minnesota as a child relates

to his claim that natural darkness can give enjoyment to onlookers. The writer

also sees the connection between darkness as a source of solitude and it

inspiring countless numbers of philosophers, artists, and stargazers for

millennia. Providing these details highlights the writer’s understanding of

Bogard’s claim that natural darkness can benefit humans. The writer continues to

demonstrate how details in Bogard’s text relate to each other and to his central

idea in the subsequent discussion of how darkness is essential to humans’ health

and to nature. Although little is directly quoted from the text, the writer’s

thorough paraphrasing of multiple details taken from across the passage

indicates that the writer comprehensively understands Bogard’s argument and is

able to convey it in his own words.

Analysis—1: The response offers ineffective analysis of Bogard’s text and

demonstrates little understanding of the analytical task. Although clearly

comprehending the entirety of Bogard’s argument, the writer does not communicate

how Bogard builds his argument with evidence, reasoning, or stylistic or

persuasive elements, nor does the writer communicate what effect Bogard’s

argumentation has on his audience. Instead of providing effective analysis, the

writer only identifies argumentative elements in Bogard’s text, such as the

appealing allusion Bogard offers regarding Van Gogh’s Starry Night or the

scientific evidence Bogard uses to support his belief in the preservation of

natural darkness. The writer instead consistently lapses into summary. Overall,

the response demonstrates inadequate analysis.

Writing—3: This mostly cohesive response demonstrates effective use and

control of language. The writer presents an effective introduction with a clear

central claim that lays out the three points discussed in the response (In order

to prove the need for natural darkness, Bogard divides his argument into three

main topics, saying that natural darkness is beneficial to humans, essential to

humans, and essential to the ecosystem). The response also includes an generally

effective conclusion that summarizes rather than advances the essay (Paul Bogard

supports the preservation of natural darkness. He uses an argument to support

his position that has three primary points—benefit to humans, need for humans

and need for nature) although the conclusion is not marked off by a paragraph

break. The response is organized clearly around the three points identified in

the introduction, and each body paragraph stays on-topic. The writer also

demonstrates a clear progression of ideas both within paragraphs and throughout

the essay. Sentence structure tends to be repetitive and simple, however. For

example, at or near the end of each body paragraph, the writer restates the

point that introduces that paragraph (Bogard then gives a scientific case that

shows why natural darkness is essential to humans.... Bogard uses scientific

evidence to support his belief in the preservation of natural darkness).

Although the writing in this response is proficient, it does not demonstrate the

sentence variety, precise word choice, or highly effective progression of ideas

that is expected at the advanced level.