Summarize the author’s argument and supporting evidence.

Hi myself Shrushtee.

Explanation:

evaluate an author's argument and develop a written response of your analysis for the SAT essay. It will also show you how to use specific examples to support your analysis.

The SAT Essay

The newest version of the SAT calls for you to write an essay in response to an author's argument. It's increasingly important for college students to know how to summarize, evaluate, and synthesize the work of other writers. Knowing how and why an author presents his point, and whether it's effective, will help you to develop effective rhetorical strategies in your own academic writing. The SAT essay is optional. If you do opt to write the essay, you will have 50 minutes to complete it.

The passage that you will evaluate on the SAT essay portion is typically taken from a previously published source. The content will vary, but these passages are generally the same in the quality and type of writing. They're arguments intended for a general audience and should not be overly technical or difficult to understand. The passage will use evidence and logic to prove a point, and your goal is to identify and evaluate the author's argument.

The Author's Argument

So how does an author present an effective argument? Consider how you might convince a friend to see your side on a particular issue. Imagine that you have a friend who has decided to buy a puppy in a pet shop. As an animal lover, you know that pet store puppies are almost always purchased from puppy mills. You also know that there are millions of great dogs in shelters, just waiting to be adopted. What type of argument could you make to convince your friend to adopt a pet instead of buying a pet store puppy?

While you might be very passionate about the issue, yelling or name-calling doesn't usually get the message across effectively. The best way to present your argument is with logic, evidence, and an appeal to your friend's emotions.

Rhetorical Strategies

There are three major ways that authors present an argument:

Reasoning, in which the author presents a logical explanation of the argument

Evidence, in which the author presents statistics, facts, and studies to prove his point

Appeal, in which the author appeals to the reader's emotions to elicit empathy

please mark me as brainleist

safety professionals realize that high-dexterity gloves result in increased safety and job performance. corporate managers know that increased safety reduces costs while increased performance enhances productivity, both of which boost the bottom line. that being said, why do we still see so many work sites where gloves are not mandated ppe or where gloves are mandated but compliance falls short of expectations? after all, the most important tools for every employee are his brains, eyes, and hands--he can't work without all three of them functioning properly.

hard hats and safety glasses top the list of required ppe at most work sites, but gloves fall to a distant third or fourth. and even when gloves are mandated, they're often found on the ground more than on employees' hands. why is that?

the reason is that lack of hand dexterity has historically made gloves too cumbersome to work in. if an employee can't adequately control the tools he or she is working with--if he can't feel the details of the metal pipe, wood beam, parcel package, machine screw, airplane wing, concrete block, pine log, steel girder, or engine part that he's handling--then the gloves themselves pose an even higher risk of injury than not wearing any gloves at all.

the lack of mandated hand protection (and the lack of compliance when it is mandated) is a direct result of traditional gloves' preventing workers from effectively and safely performing their jobs. if linda's gloves are too cumbersome to allow her to position a set of steel springs with one hand and pneumatically staple them to a mattress frame with the other hand, she's just not going to wear them. can you blame her?

in a nutshell, the lack of dexterity in gloves has prevented them from becoming universally required and accepted hand protection. and that's a sad thing, because no matter how talented you are at the job you perform, you can't work with injured hands.