GED Essay Sample Response
Below is a sample response to our GED Essay Practice Question. Review this response to develop familiarity with the structure of a high-scoring essay. You may notice that this essay follows the template that’s featured in our GED Essay Writing Guide. At the end of this response, there is a short commentary that explains why this is an effective essay and why it would receive a perfect score.
In the two passages, Please Recycle! by Alexandra Alesi and The Recycling Racket by Jenni Sadler, the authors present very different views on the value of recycling. Alesi argues that recycling is an important moral and environmental responsibility, while Sadler argues that it is expensive, inefficient, and distracts from more serious issues. Although both authors provide some evidence, Alesi presents the stronger argument because she uses clear statistics and appeals to the ethical responsibility of protecting the planet.
Alesi’s passage focuses on the environmental benefits of recycling. She explains that recycling reduces harmful emissions by cutting down on the need to harvest and transport new resources. She also provides specific statistics, such as the fact that every ton of recycled paper saves 17 trees and that recycling aluminum uses 95% less energy than producing it from raw materials. These concrete examples make her argument convincing because they show real, measurable benefits. Alesi also appeals to ethics by saying it is the “morally sound thing to do.” This makes her case stronger because she connects the facts to a bigger purpose: the responsibility to protect the Earth for future generations.
Sadler, on the other hand, argues that recycling is too costly and not worth the effort. She points out that running recycling programs requires trucks and processing plants, which can be more expensive than simply making new products. She also notes that landfill space is not running out, so recycling may not be as necessary as many believe. While these are valid points, Sadler weakens her argument by using dismissive language, such as calling recycling a “foolish presumption” and claiming that landfill concerns are “absurd.” This tone makes her essay sound less balanced and more emotional, even though she is trying to be logical. In addition, Sadler provides fewer statistics and more general statements, which makes her evidence feel weaker compared to Alesi’s detailed numbers.
In conclusion, both authors make interesting points about recycling, but Alesi’s essay is more persuasive. She combines specific data with an ethical call to action, while Sadler relies on cost concerns and a sarcastic tone that undercuts her credibility. Alesi shows that recycling may not solve everything, but it is still a practical and meaningful step we can take to protect the environment.
Commentary
This sample essay would receive a perfect score on the GED. The writer clearly read the prompt carefully, compared both passages, and planned the structure before writing. The response demonstrates proper organization:
- Paragraph 1—Introduction
- Paragraph 2—Alesi’s argument (statistics and ethics)
- Paragraph 3—Sadler’s argument (cost and tone)
- Paragraph 4—Conclusion
The introduction briefly summarizes each author’s position and clearly states a thesis: Alesi’s argument is stronger because of her use of statistics and ethical appeals. This demonstrates that the student understands both passages and can take a clear stance, which is required by the rubric.
In the body paragraphs, the student shows strength in each scoring category:
- Analysis of Arguments and Use of Evidence: The essay includes direct references to statistics from Alesi (“every ton of recycled paper saves 17 trees”) and to tone from Sadler (“foolish presumption” and “absurd”). These specific examples prove that the student can identify and evaluate the evidence and strategies used by both writers.
- Development of Ideas and Structure: The organization is logical and easy to follow. One paragraph is devoted to explaining why Alesi’s evidence is persuasive, while another focuses on weaknesses in Sadler’s style and support. Transitions like “on the other hand” and “in conclusion” help ideas flow smoothly from one section to the next.
- Clarity and Command of Standard English: The writing is clear, direct, and free from distracting errors. Sentences are complete and varied in structure. Word choice is formal but not overly advanced, making it appropriate for a high-school–level response.
The essay concludes by summarizing the analysis and restating why Alesi’s passage is stronger. The student acknowledges that both authors make “interesting points,” which shows awareness of complexity, but firmly returns to the thesis. This strengthens the overall persuasiveness of the essay.