Question 3: The Argument Prompt

This question drops the sources entirely. You get a short claim, often about some tension in public life, and you supply the evidence from what you know: history, reading, observation, current events. That is the point. The other two questions test how you handle given material. This one tests whether you can generate a case from scratch and argue it with specifics instead of vague gesturing.

The wording, usually 'write an essay that argues your position,' is built to permit three moves. You can agree with the claim outright, disagree with it outright, or qualify it by marking where it holds and where it breaks down. All three count as a position, because all three give a reader something to argue back against. What fails is refusing to land anywhere: restating the claim, listing both sides without choosing, or hedging so much that no one could disagree with you. A qualified position is not that. Saying a claim holds for public spaces built before some date and fails for those built after draws a real line, and lines can be disputed, which is exactly what the thesis row rewards.

Where this question tends to go wrong is in the commentary. A writer who picks the easier side, or argues a position she does not actually hold because she has three ready examples, often finds the reasoning thins out past the examples themselves. The evidence gets you started; explaining why it proves your claim is what carries the essay, and that is harder to fake than people expect.