Principles for good writing in GP:

- Technical
o Good grammar and spelling
o Concise and precise
o Formal (no colloquialisms*, conversational language, reduced use of very or really)
Use colloquialisms with quotation marks (e.g. K-Pop, bae)
- Content
o Factual vs based on prejudice / stereotypes / sweeping statements / hyperboles /
overgeneralisations
o Reasoned vs call to emotion fallacy vs jumping to conclusions
Sounds like your words could come from a wise sage who is knowledgeable
about the issue
o No excessive technical details or jargon breaks down the question in everyday,
accessible terms
o (almost) Every sentence works directly or indirectly to answer the question (not too
crucial or easy to ensure in your writing, but its a critical part of a good essay)
o Makes reference to philosophical/logic-based terms (e.g. mutually exclusive,
fallacious/fallacy, corollary, we can deduce that, This implies, the implication
is that, zero-sum game)

A good paragraph

- Should try to have at least 2 3 examples if it wants to show a larger global/societal trend
o But can also have just 1 very well-elaborated example (use your case studies for this) if
its talking about an extreme situation
- Should sound a little detached
- Thesis statement should be mentioned in the first 2 sentences
- Should not be too long (over 12 sentences long) or too short (2 3 sentences only)

What points should you use?

- Some go-to considerations (these will all take up 1 body para)

o Questioning the question / an assumption (the assumption is flawed; reality is
otherwise, hence, I do not agree with the question)
o Reaching a middle ground (neither A nor B are viable; instead, there should be A with Y
concession, or B with X concession, so that both situation A and B can coexist at the
same time)
o Positive vs negative side: Instead of being harmful, X can also be beneficial
o DC vs LDCs: Y is the case / applicable in DCs but not LDCs (and vice versa)
o X is not targeting the root cause / there are other unaddressed aspects that must be
solved before the issue can be resolved
Similar: X is a symptom/tool/manifestation, not the root cause
o X is not mutually exclusive with Y (not employable for all questions; usually just ones
that couch a false dichotomy)
o X cant be achieved because its impractical (i.e. expensive, not enough technology,
inadequate knowledge, inadequate political will)
 o Correlation =/= causation (but: neither is it coincidence)
o Reversed causal relationship: The qsuestion/author states that X led to Y, but this is
false. In reality, Y led to X.

Youve been thrown into the arena of academic writing by GP. In this arena, the only accepted weapons
are:

- Facts
- Reasonable hypotheticals based on generalized real-world phenomena (e.g. people using credit
cards, cashless systems, interracial marriages on the rise, recycling on a very slow, negligent
rise)

Your choice of weapons must all work to answer the question directly.

Are you answering the question?

- Ask yourself the same question youre attempting to answer and use your paragraph to answer
it. Does it sound relevant, is it what you might say in a formal debate? Is it the most convincing
argument you would have used? If no

Some grey areas

- Sarcasm or snark
- Overly impassioned writing

Formal vs informal writing

This should not be shocking considering Millennials are quickly becoming the most influential
population in our market today (formal) vs Its amazing how quickly millennials are joining our
workplaces. (informal)

- To make the latter sentence sound more formal: Many have been amazed lately by how quickly
millennials are joining our workplaces. Note, very crucially, that I have changed the sentence to
sound more detached and removed the authors emotions of sort.

DISPLAY YOUR ESSAY CHOPS

How to show nuance?

- Nuance, in the GP context = showing the examiner you understand a contexts complexity +
know there are exceptions
o Misconception: you must introduce nuance EVERY. SINGLE. SECOND.
o Truth: only at appropriate points, mainly to gradualise statements that would seem
sweeping, stupid or simplistic otherwise! Or to explain the broader picture of the issue,
introduce a critical thinking point, etc.

How to link an example to the question

 - Structure goes like this: describe the example. Explain example-specific learning points. Explain
universal learning point (must be relevant to question). [Applies even if youre using multiple
examples in one para, or just one very developed example in that para.]
o Describe the example: just summarise what, when, where it happened. WHAT level of
description
o Example specific learning point: essentially just a few details on what happened what it
shows about the issue/solution/way forward. The focus is on WHAT with some HOW
o Universal learning point: talk more generally, angle your statement towards a
sweeping statement, BUT one that is qualified/nuanced tentative.
o This is just an expansion of the typical PEEL structure in schools, where E for Explain
becomes Explain The Example Very Deeply, using an example-specific learning point and
universal learning point.

What helps

- Thinking on your feet, thinking through nuance fast

o To introduce nuance you must be able to anticipate some common objections to what
youre about to say. Either know your area of knowledge so well that youre aware of
common counterarguments in that field or have a few handy ones ready on hand
o Please note: theres a difference between rebutting a counterargument through one
whole dedicated paragraph, and doing a much smaller, minor implicit rebuttal that
occupies only 1 2 sentences inside a paragraph and accompanies your mention of an
example.
The former is done to break down the counterargument and convince the
reader why youre ultimately in support of your stance (usually the rebuttal is
right before the conclusion).
The latter is done to nuance the example and indicate that you understand its
complexity, if youre scared that its not a watertight or 150% convincing
example.
- Common objections to your example (aka reasons people might not be convinced by it; address
these so these people will, in fact, be convinced!) Addressing these is necessary to score well.
o What about exception X?
o When wont this example work?
o Is this example really representative?
o Is this example really caused by Problem X?
o Is correlation really causation?

What example to choose? / Why did my example gain me no marks although it was factually correct?

- Remember this principle: compare like to like. You must compare apples to apples, oranges to
oranges.
o If Qn is on governments, example must be of a government, not an NGO or any other
entity
o Specialised topics will be more strict and narrow with regards to the kind of EGs you
can use: politics, the environment, social media, the arts
 Conversely Social issue questions have the most easygoing scope for examples
- Ensure your EG is representative not too minor, etc.
o This is rarely an issue as it can be solved by: having good links (use the technique above:
example-specific learning pt + universal learning pt) and listing more than 1 example in
the paragraph such that your example sounds representative and comprehensive
eventually
- Good links are important.
o From my notes for Geog but also relevant to GP: Knowing an appropriate example is
only half the battle. Being a competent wordsmith who can link the example to the
question is the other. To be honest, its impossible (unless you have a photographic
memory) to mug every excruciating detail for your case studies. Get used to coming up
with links on the spot. [] Furthermore, not every detail for an example is always
relevant to the question (e.g. is the economic cause of urban decay relevant to a
question asking about its social impacts? Not really. To a question on whether urban
decay leads to crime? Perhaps, but only if you touch on how economic deprivation
causing urban decay also drives the poor to commit petty crimes just to survive.)