: So the problem is that if I choose to disagree with the statement, I don't know if that means I'm arguing against any type of term limits, or term limits of specifically five years...

@Hamaas631

Vote Up Vote Down

So the problem is that if I choose to disagree with the statement, I don't know if that means I'm arguing against any type of term limits, or term limits of specifically five years...

Wait a minute; where did the prompt ask you to agree or disagree with the statement?

Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy and explain how these consequences shape your position.

I don't interpret anything in that language dictating that your position needs to be wholesale agreement or disagreement with the policy. In fact, the prompt seems open-ended enough that it practically invites a more complex position than a simple yes-or-no answer.

I'd say it's an ideal setup for writing about how five years is an arbitrary limit, and how term limits might be a fine idea, but the notion that every field – politics, industry, and education – should be saddled with a universal limit is silly. Why should the principle of a school be held to the same limit as an elected mayor, or the CEO of a company?

(0)

Login to post a comment!