The Regents ELA Exam: Tips For Part 2 of the Regents ELA Exam - Argument

Argument

What does this Part of the Exam Require?
First, you must read and comprehend four informational texts. Depending on the topic, these may be examples of literary non-fiction, journalism, scientific publications meant for the general reader, or historical documents. There are no multiple-choice questions in this part of the exam.

As in Part 1 of the exam, you must:
- Determine the central ideas of texts, including how ideas within and across texts interact and build on one another.
- Analyze a complex set of ideas and events.
- Determine the meanings of words and phrases as they are used in texts, including figurative, connotative, and technical meanings.

Then, you must take a position on the question and compose an evidence-based argument supported by your analysis of the texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence from at least three of the texts. An effective essay of argument must clearly establish a claim that can be sufficiently supported with reliable evidence. The organization must be clear and coherent, and the writing is expected to demonstrate command of standard written English. These are reading, research, thinking, and writing skills that high school students are expected to demonstrate across the curriculum.

What does This Part of the Exam Look Like?
The topic is often based on a controversial issue of recent or current interest. Here is an example from the January 2016 Regents ELA exam.

Sample Task – Evidence-Based Writing

Directions
Closely read each of the four texts provided on pages 23 through 31 and write a source-based argument on the topic below. You may use the margins to take notes as you read and scrap paper to plan your response.

Topic: Should food be genetically modified?

Your Task: Carefully read each of the four texts provided. Then, using evidence from at least three of the texts, write a well-developed argument regarding the genetic modification of food. Clearly establish your claim, distinguish your claim from alternate or opposing claims, and use specific, relevant, and sufficient evidence from at least three of the texts to develop your argument. Do not simply summarize each text.

Guidelines:
Be sure to:
- Establish your claim regarding the genetic modification of food.
- Distinguish your claim from alternate or opposing claims.
- Use specific, relevant, and sufficient evidence from at least three of the texts to develop your argument.
- Identify each source that you reference by text number and line number(s) or graphic (for example: Text 1, line 4 or Text 2, graphic).
- Organize your ideas in a cohesive and coherent manner.
- Maintain a formal style of writing.
- Follow the conventions of standard written English.

Texts:
Text 1—GMOs 101
Text 2—GMO Reality Check
Text 3—GMO Foods: Key Points in the Genetically Modified Debate
Text 4—The Truth about Genetically Modified Food

- Text 1

GMOs 101
The six questions on every shopper’s mind about the new biotech foods. …
1 What are GMOs [Genetically Modified Organism], and what are they used for?

A GMO is created by injecting genetic material from plants, animals, or bacteria into a crop in hopes of creating a new and beneficial trait. For example, one of the most popular genetically modified (GM) crops is a corn plant that’s capable of producing its own pesticide, called Bt, which is also used in spray form by some organic farmers. The idea is to make the plant resistant to insect damage and to limit the amount of harmful pesticides farmers have to spray. Other GM plants, such as Roundup Ready corn, were created to survive the spraying of the herbicide Roundup, which kills weeds and would normally kill the plant, too, says Stephen H. Howell, Ph.D., director of the Plant Sciences Institute at Iowa State University.
Researchers are also using the technology experimentally as a way to nutritionally enhance fruits and vegetables.
Some GMO supporters say that both applications are necessary to help feed a growing world population, especially in poor countries where drought and famine are common. But there is very little agreement on whether biotechnology offers a uniform way to address world hunger. “We have plenty of food for the world right now. It’s not the deficiency of technology that’s a problem for developing countries,” says Jane Rissler, Ph.D., a senior staff scientist with the Union of Concerned Scientists, a nonprofit watchdog group that partners with 80,000 researchers. The international hunger problem, she says, stems from “poverty, corruption, and poor distribution.”

2 What kinds of foods contain GMOs?
About 80 percent of the food on grocery-store shelves already contains at least some ingredients made from altered genes. This means that almost any processed food, from salad dressing to snack crackers, could contain GMOs, unless it has been certified organic (federal regulations explicitly restrict food manufacturers from using the organic seal on products made with GMOs). That’s because corn, soy, and canola are the top three GM food crops in the United States, so anything that is produced with corn syrup, high-fructose corn syrup, or soybean or corn oil might include GMOs.
     Very little fresh produce on the market, though, is genetically engineered, with the exceptions of most papaya, some squash, and a few strains of sweet corn. Meanwhile, we’re not the only ones consuming GMOs—animals do, too. GM corn and soybeans are often used in livestock feed, though there’s no evidence that GMOs show up in your steak or chops.

3 Should I be concerned about the safety of GM foods?
     Federal agencies like the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) say that they are safe, and there have been no documented cases of illness due to consumption of GMOs. The American Medical Association agrees at this point and has encouraged ongoing research in the field. …

4 What do GM crops mean for the environment?
     “I think a lot of scientists agree that there are no known environmental problems with the crops that are out there now,” says Allison Snow, Ph.D., who studies environmental risk and genetically modified crops as a professor of ecology at Ohio State University. But organic farmers are becoming increasingly concerned about maintaining the integrity of their crops. For example, if Bt corn is planted too close to a neighboring organic-corn crop, crosspollination could occur and contaminate the latter. Scientists on both sides of the debate also widely agree that insects will eventually become resistant to the Bt crops, Snow says. “It could happen any year now. Then we would be back where we started, and we would have lost a valuable tool for managing insects,” Snow says. …

5 Is it possible to live completely GMO-free?
Probably not. A study commissioned by the Union of Concerned Scientists and released in February already suggests that seeds that are supposedly non-GMO may be unintentionally tainted. Genetically engineered DNA was found in at least half of the small sample of tested corn and soybean seeds, and about 83 percent of the canola seeds. Even if you buy only certified-organic products, you probably can’t avoid GMOs completely. That’s because it is also possible for organic food crops to become inadvertently contaminated. …

6 What will we see next from the biotech-food market?
Here are some GM foods that might end up on store shelves:
• The FDA and USDA are currently reviewing safety data on a variety of genetically engineered wheat that would tolerate the herbicide Roundup.
• Researchers are also working on wheat varieties that would resist drought, be less allergenic to those with gluten intolerance, and be more nutritious.
Consumers may also start seeing major nutritional benefits in the future:
• Scientists at the University of California, Riverside, announced last year [2003] that they genetically engineered a corn plant to produce up to four times the normal amount of vitamin C by inserting a gene from wheat plants. The researchers have filed a patent application and are soliciting companies that might be interested in commercializing the product. …
• Other biotech foods that are currently in development include a vitamin A–enhanced rice and a tomato with increased amounts of the cancer-fighting antioxidant lycopene.
• Monsanto Co., which is the largest producer of GM seeds, is continuing to tinker with soybeans in hopes of developing a variety that could produce an oil containing few or no saturated and trans fats.
—Alisa Blackwood excerpted and adapted from Health, May 2004

Text 2
GMO Reality Check
… GMO Basics
So what are GMOs? To put it simply, they’re plants and seeds created in laboratories. Genetic engineers insert genes from bacteria, viruses, animals, or humans into the DNA of a food crop or animal to create an organism that would never occur in nature. Biotech companies do this for two main reasons: to make crops that are tolerant to herbicides such as RoundUp that kill other plants, and to make crops that produce their own insecticides. The FDA’s own scientists actually warned that these never-before-seen foods could create new toxins and new allergens and needed to be more thoroughly tested, but their concerns were largely ignored. Instead, the US government took the official position that GM foods were “substantially equivalent” to conventional foods and didn’t require safety testing or labeling—in sharp contrast to 40 other countries that require such foods be clearly labeled. Commercial planting of genetically modified seeds in the United States began in 1996, and soon after, food products containing GMOs began appearing on store shelves, mostly without our knowledge.
By 2011, 94 percent of all soybeans and 88 percent of all corn grown in the United States was genetically modified. Soy and corn, along with other common GM foods (including canola oil. [sic] cottonseed oil, and sugar from sugar beets), are used as ingredients in countless other products, so many Americans—including health food shoppers—likely have been eating GM foods without realizing it.

No Benefits, Just Risks
What we didn’t know about what we were eating may already be harming us. Based on animal research with GM foods, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) says that there are serious health risks associated with eating GM foods, including infertility, immune system problems, accelerated aging, disruption of insulin and cholesterol regulation, gastrointestinal issues, and changes in organs. In 2009, the AAEM urged doctors to prescribe non-GMO diets for all Americans, saying that doctors are probably seeing negative health effects in their patients right now without realizing that GM foods are major contributing factors.
Genetically modified crops pose risks to the environment, too, including the serious threat of GM seeds spreading to and contaminating both organic and conventional crop fields. Plus, the biotech industry claims that genetic engineering reduces the use of pesticides, but research shows otherwise. According to a 2009 report by the Organic Center, overall pesticide use dramatically increased—about 318 million pounds—in the first thirteen years after GM crops were introduced.
Herbicides sprayed in high amounts on GM herbicide-resistant crops have led to the development and spread of so-called “superweeds”—weeds that are able to adapt to and withstand typical herbicides. And the biotech companies’ proposed solution to this problem? Create new GM crops that are resistant to ever more toxic chemicals, including 2, 4-D—a major com- ponent of Agent Orange.1 It’s a “crazy” idea because weeds would eventually adapt to that herbicide and any others, says Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of the Center for Food Safety and author of Your Right to Know:
Genetic Engineering and the Secret Changes in Your Food. The most important thing to know about GM foods is that they benefit only the chemical companies that produce them, says Kimbrell. “[The biotech companies] have yet to produce anything that benefits the consumer. There’s no better taste, no better nutrition, no lower price. That’s the dirty little secret that’s hardly ever reported. That’s why those companies don’t want GM foods labeled. They don’t want the consumer to be able to have the choice to say, ‘I want the same price, less risky version.’”…
—Melissa Diane Smith excerpted from “GMO Reality Check”
Better Nutrition, August 2012

Text 3
GMO Foods: Key Points in the Genetically Modified Debate
… Safe or Unsafe?

Most studies show genetically modified foods are safe for human consumption, though it is widely acknowledged that the long-term health effects are unknown. The Food and Drug Administration generally recognized these foods as safe, and the World Health Organization has said no ill health effects have resulted on the international market.
Opponents on both sides of the Atlantic say there has been inadequate testing and regulation. They worry that people who eat genetically modified foods may be more prone to allergies or diseases resistant to antibiotics. But they have been hard pressed to show scientific studies to back up those fears.
     GM foods have been a mainstay in the U.S. for more than a decade. Most of the crops are used for animal feed or in common processed foods such as cookies, cereal, potato chips and salad dressing.
Europe largely bans genetically engineered foods and has strict requirements on labeling them. They do allow the import of a number of GM crops such as soy, mostly for animal feed, and individual European countries have opted to plant these types of crops. Genetically engineered corn is grown in Spain, though it amounts to only a fraction of European farmland. …



Can GM Food Help Combat World Hunger?
By 2050, the world’s population is projected to rise to 9 billion from just over 7 billion currently. Proponents of genetically modified foods say they are safe and can boost harvests even in bad conditions by protecting against pests, weeds and drought. This, they argue, will be essential to meeting the needs of a booming population in decades to come and avoiding starvation. However Doug Gurian-Sherman, senior scientist for the food and environment program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, an advocacy group, said genetic engineering for insect resistance has provided only a modest increase in yields since the 1990s and drought-resistant strains have only modestly reduced losses from drought.
Moreover, he said conventional crossbreeding or cross-pollinating of different varieties for desirable traits, along with improved farming, are getting better results boosting yields at a lower cost. In fact, much of the food Americans eat has been genetically modified by those conventional methods over thousands of years, before genetic engineering came into practice. … Andrea Roberto Sonnino, chief of research at the U.N. food agency, said total food production at present is enough to feed the entire global population. The problem is uneven distribution, leaving 870 million suffering from hunger. He said world food production will need to increase by 60 percent to meet the demands of 9 billion by 2050. This must be achieved by increasing yields, he added, because there is little room to expand cultivated land used for agriculture.
     Genetically modified foods, in some instances, can help if the individual product has been assessed as safe, he said. “It’s an opportunity that we cannot just miss.”



To Label or Not to Label?
Europe requires all GM food to be labeled unless GM ingredients amount to 0.9 percent or less of the total. The U.S. does not require labels on the view that genetically modified food is not materially different than nonmodified food. Opponents of labeling say it would scare consumers away from safe foods, giving the appearance that there is something wrong with them.
U.S. activists insist consumers should have the right to choose whether to eat genetically modified foods and that labeling would offer them that choice, whether the foods are safe or not. They are pushing for labeling at the state and federal level. California voters last year rejected a ballot initiative that would have required GM food labeling. The legislatures of Connecticut and Maine have passed laws to label genetically modified foods, and more than 20 other states are contemplating labeling. …

—Marjorie Olster excerpted from “GMO Foods:

Key Points in the Genetically Modified Debate”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com, August 2, 2013

Text 4
The Truth about Genetically Modified Food
… Benefits and Worries
The bulk of the science on GM safety points in one direction. Take it from David Zilberman, a U.C. Berkeley agricultural and environmental economist and one of the few researchers considered credible by both agricultural chemical companies and their critics. He argues that the benefits of GM crops greatly outweigh the health risks, which so far remain theoretical. The use of GM crops “has lowered the price of food,” Zilberman says. “It has increased farmer safety by allowing them to use less pesticide. It has raised the output of corn, cotton and soy by 20 to 30 percent, allowing some people to survive who would not have without it. If it were more widely adopted around the world, the price [of food] would go lower, and fewer people would die of hunger.” …
Despite such promise, much of the world has been busy banning, restricting and otherwise shunning GM foods. Nearly all the corn and soybeans grown in the U.S. are genetically modified, but only two GM crops, Monsanto’s MON810 maize and BASF’s Amflora potato, are accepted in the European Union. Eight E.U. nations have banned GM crops outright.
Throughout Asia, including in India and China, governments have yet to approve most GM crops, including an insect-resistant rice that produces higher yields with less pesticide. In Africa, where millions go hungry, several nations have refused to import GM foods in spite of their lower costs (the result of higher yields and a reduced need for water and pesticides). Kenya has banned them altogether amid widespread malnutrition. No country has definite plans to grow Golden Rice, a crop engineered to deliver more vitamin A than spinach (rice normally has no vitamin A), even though vitamin A deficiency causes more than one million deaths annually and half a million cases of irreversible blindness in the developing world. …



A Clean Record
… Could eating plants with altered genes allow new DNA to work its way into our own? It is theoretically possible but hugely improbable. Scientists have never found genetic material that could survive a trip through the human gut and make it into cells. Besides, we are routinely exposed to—we even consume—the viruses and bacteria whose genes end up in GM foods. The bacterium B. thuringiensis, for example, which produces proteins fatal to insects, is sometimes enlisted as a natural pesticide in organic farming. “We’ve been eating this stuff for thousands of years,” [Robert] Goldberg [a plant molecular biologist] says.
In any case, proponents say, people have consumed as many as trillions of meals containing genetically modified ingredients over the past few decades. Not a single verified case of illness has ever been attributed to the genetic alterations. Mark Lynas, a prominent anti-GM activist who last year publicly switched to strongly supporting the technology, has pointed out that every single news-making food disaster on record has been attributed to non-GM crops, such as the Escherichia coli—infected organic bean sprouts that killed 53 people in Europe in 2011. …
Plenty of other credible groups have arrived at the same conclusion. Gregory Jaffe, director of biotechnology at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a science-based consumer-watchdog group in Washington, D.C., takes pains to note that the center has no official stance, pro or con, with regard to genetically modifying food plants. Yet Jaffe insists the scientific record is clear. “Current GM crops are safe to eat and can be grown safely in the environment,” he says. The American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Medical Association and the National Academy of Sciences have all unreservedly backed GM crops. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, along with its counterparts in several other countries, has repeatedly reviewed large bodies of research and concluded that GM crops pose no unique health threats. Dozens of review studies carried out by academic researchers have backed that view. …
—David H. Freedman excerpted and adapted
from “The Truth about Genetically Modified Food”

http://www.scientificamerican.com, August 20, 2013


Looking at the Texts
Text 1—GMOs 101: The Six Questions on Every Shoppers Mind About the Bew Biotech Foods…
—Alisa Blackwood, excerpted and adapted from “GMOs 101,” Health, May 2004
This is an article from a popular, generally well-regarded magazine. The question and answer format serves as a good introduction to the topic. The article is rich in information, and details and opinions are documented, which suggests that the sources are reliable. The tone and purpose seem to be objective.

Text 2—GMO Reality Check
—Melissa Diane Smith, excerpted from “GMO Reality Check,” Better Nutrition, August 2012
This is a good example of a document in which one side of the issue is forcefully expressed. The writer cites sources for much of the information used to support her opposition to the use of GMO foods. This would be an excellent source for the student writer who establishes a claim opposed to the use of GMO foods.

Text 3—GMO Foods: Key Points in the Genetically Modified Debate
—Marjorie Olster, excerpted from “GMO Foods: Key Points in the Genetically Modified Debate,” http://www.huffingtonpost.com, August 2, 2013
Here is an example of a document that outlines the key points in the debate and offers detailed information both on the development of GMO foods and on how governments in the United States and Europe regulate them. This article acknowledges competing points of view and offers information that could be used to support a variety of arguments.

Text 4—The Truth About Genetically Modified Food
—David H. Freedman, excerpted and adapted from “The Truth about Genetically Modified Food,” http://www.scientificamerican.com, August 20, 2013
This article presents a very clear opinion on one side of the argument. It is well documented and offers strong evidence for the student writer who establishes a claim for the use of GMO foods.
Note that two of the texts are rich in background information and acknowledge opposing points of view. They can be helpful to the student writer when determining which argument to make. The other two texts offer forceful arguments for one side or the other. All texts include useful information and are documented with reliable sources.

Know The Rubric
Scoring Rubric for Part 2
Content and Analysis: The extent to which the essay conveys complex ideas and information clearly and accurately in order to support claims in an analysis of the texts.

High Scores
- 6 Essays introduce a precise and insightful claim, as directed by the task and demonstrate in-depth and insightful analysis of the texts, as necessary to support the claim and to distinguish the claim from alternate or opposing claims.
- 5 Essays introduce a precise and thoughtful claim, as directed by the task and demonstrate thorough analysis of the texts, as necessary to support the claim and to distinguish the claim from alternate or opposing claims.

Middle Scores
- 4 Essays introduce a precise claim, as directed by the task and demonstrate appropriate and accurate analysis of the texts, as necessary to support the claim and to distinguish the claim from alternate or opposing claims.
- 3 Essays introduce a reasonable claim, as directed by the task and demonstrate some analysis of the texts, but insufficiently distinguish the claim from alternate or opposing claims.

Low Scores
- 2 Essays introduce a claim and demonstrate confused or unclear analysis of the texts, failing to distinguish the claim from alternate or opposing claims.
- 1 Essays do not introduce a claim; do not demonstrate analysis of the texts.

Command of Evidence: The extent to which the essay presents evidence from the provided texts to support analysis.

High Scores
- 6 Essays present ideas fully and thoughtfully, making highly effective use of a wide range of specific and relevant evidence to support analysis and demonstrate proper citation of sources to avoid plagiarism when dealing with direct quotes and paraphrased material.
- 5 Essays present ideas clearly and accurately, making effective use of specific and relevant evidence to support analysis and demonstrate proper citation of sources to avoid plagiarism when dealing with direct quotes and paraphrased material.

Middle Scores
- 4 Essays present ideas sufficiently, making adequate use of specific and relevant evidence to support analysis and demonstrate proper citation of sources to avoid plagiarism when dealing with direct quotes and paraphrased material.
- 3 Essays present ideas briefly, making use of some specific and relevant evidence to support analysis and demonstrate inconsistent citation of sources to avoid plagiarism when dealing with direct quotes and paraphrased material.

Low Scores
- 2 Essays present ideas inconsistently and/or inaccurately, in an attempt to support analysis, making use of some evidence that may be irrelevant and demonstrate little use of citations to avoid plagiarism when dealing with direct quotes and paraphrased material.
- 1 Essays present little or no evidence from the texts; do not make use of citations.

Coherence, Organization, and Style: The extent to which the essay logically organizes complex ideas, concepts, and information using formal style and precise language.

High Scores
- 6 Essays exhibit skillful organization of ideas and information to create a cohesive and coherent essay and establish and maintain a formal style, using sophisticated language and structure.
- 5 Essays exhibit logical organization of ideas and information to create a cohesive and coherent essay and establish and maintain a formal style, using fluent and precise language and sound structure.

Middle Scores
- 4 Essays exhibit acceptable organization of ideas and information to create a coherent essay and establish and maintain a formal style, using precise and appropriate language and structure.
- 3 Essays exhibit some organization of ideas and information to create a mostly coherent essay and establish but fail to maintain a formal style, using primarily basic language and structure.

Low Scores
- 2 Essays exhibit inconsistent organization of ideas and information, failing to create a coherent essay and lack a formal style, using some language that is inappropriate or imprecise.
- 1 Essays exhibit little organization of ideas and information, making assessment unreliable; use language that is predominantly incoherent, inappropriate, or copied directly from the task or texts.

Control of Conventions: The extent to which the essay demonstrates command of conventions of standard English grammar, usage, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling.

High Scores
- 6 Essays demonstrate control of conventions with essentially no errors, even with sophisticated language.
- 5 Essays demonstrate control of the conventions, exhibiting occasional errors only when using sophisticated language.

Middle Scores
- 4 Essays demonstrate partial control, exhibiting occasional errors that do not hinder comprehension.
- 3 Essays demonstrate emerging control, exhibiting occasional errors that hinder comprehension.

Low Scores
- 2 Essays demonstrate a lack of control, exhibiting frequent errors that make comprehension difficult.
- 1 Essays are minimal, making assessment of conventions unreliable.


Strategies and Review
- The reading, writing, and discussion you do in English, social studies, and science classes form the basis of your preparation for this part of the exam.
- There is no “right answer.” The topic and the texts provide for a variety of legitimate claims. Your task is to compose a relevant and defensible argument.
- Plan your response. This need not be a formal outline, but take time to articulate clearly what your claim (argument) will be. Then number and underline in the texts three or four passages that you can cite to support your argument.Decide on the most effective order for the examples.
- Review the Glossaries in order to recognize literary and rhetorical elements.
- Review the actual ELA/Exams and the Answers Explained.