gp-essay-writing

name

gp-essay-writing

description

Guide the full process of Singapore GCE A-Level H1 General Paper essay writing, from question selection and topic analysis to brainstorming, thesis-building, paragraph planning, drafting, review, and refinement. Use when asked to handle GP essay prompts on any topic area such as the arts, science, sport, media, leadership, ethics, tradition, healthcare, politics, or social issues, with examiner expectations assumed to be Singaporean or British.

GP Essay Writing

Overview

Guide another Codex instance through the entire GP essay workflow rather than jumping straight to prose. Keep the method topic-agnostic: the same workflow should work for prompts on arts, science, leadership, tradition, profit, healthcare, media, sport, or any other GP domain.

Full Workflow

1. Identify the task and the output. Decide whether the user wants:

• help choosing among questions
• question analysis
• brainstorming
• a thesis
• a paragraph plan
• topic sentences
• a full essay
• examiner-style feedback
• tone adaptation

2. If the user has multiple essay questions, shortlist before writing. Choose the question that offers:

• the clearest understanding of the key terms
• enough arguments on both sides
• enough specific examples
• a path to a nuanced thesis rather than a one-sided rant

If needed, compare 2-3 candidate questions briefly before committing.

3. Unpack the question before generating content. Do all of the following:

• define the key terms in practical rather than dictionary form
• identify qualifiers such as always, only, too, today, in your society, to what extent, how far, worth, effective, or constructive
• identify the scope: global, national, institutional, personal, moral, political, economic, cultural
• identify what kind of judgement the question demands: extent, effectiveness, truth, desirability, comparison, or causation
• identify what a serious counterargument would look like

4. Convert the prompt into a real argumentative question. Examples:

• To what extent are the arts able to encourage constructive dialogue in your society? becomes: when and how do the arts genuinely foster discussion, and what limits reduce that effect?
• Assess the view that scientific progress is always worth the risks it poses. becomes: which risks are acceptable, which are not, and who gets to decide?
• Does the pursuit of profit undermine the healthcare industry? becomes: when does profit improve efficiency or innovation, and when does it distort care?

5. Brainstorm breadth before selecting the final line of argument. Use perspective frameworks such as PERMS or SPERM as prompts:

• S: social effects
• P: political and institutional effects
• E: economic incentives and trade-offs
• R: ethical, moral, or religious considerations
• M: media, communication, representation, and narratives

Also test other useful lenses when needed:

• individual vs society
• short-term vs long-term
• ideal principle vs real-world implementation
• elite groups vs ordinary citizens
• Singapore vs overseas examples

6. Build the planning skeleton in this order. Use these headings whenever they help:

• Fundamental principles in conflict
• Important tensions to explore
• Direction
  • Yes: strongest reasons for agreement
  • No: strongest limits, counterarguments, or conditions

7. Decide the thesis before writing paragraphs. Prefer a qualified thesis to an absolutist one. State both the main claim and its limit, especially for prompts that invite balance or evaluation.

8. Generate topic sentences that advance the thesis. Write 3-4 topic sentences. Aim for this progression:

• one paragraph establishing the strongest reason for your main stance
• one paragraph extending or deepening that argument
• one paragraph using a different lens or domain
• one limitation, concession, or rebuttal paragraph

9. Decide examples only after the argument is clear. For each paragraph, choose 1-2 examples that prove the point efficiently. Prefer examples that are:

• specific rather than generic
• recognisable without lengthy explanation
• varied across place, institution, or time period
• current when the question uses unstable qualifiers such as today or increasingly

10. Draft with simple structure.

• Introduction:
  • define the dispute
  • narrow the scope if needed
  • state the thesis and extent clearly
• Body paragraph:
  • topic sentence
  • explanation
  • example
  • analysis
  • link back to the question
• Conclusion:
  • answer the question directly
  • restate extent
  • preserve the main qualification or limit

11. Review for relevance before style. Check:

• Does each paragraph answer the exact question?
• Is the extent of agreement clear?
• Are key qualifiers addressed?
• Are counterarguments acknowledged fairly?
• Are examples analysed rather than merely inserted?
• Is the conclusion consistent with the body?

Heuristics

• Use perspective frameworks such as PERMS or SPERM only as brainstorming tools.
• Do not force one paragraph per perspective category.
• Distinguish principle from implementation.
• Distinguish whether the question is asking what ought to happen, what usually happens, or what happens in your society.
• When a question mentions in your society, decide early whether Singapore is the primary frame and bring in local examples where they genuinely strengthen the argument.
• When a question uses absolutes such as always, never, or better, test exceptions aggressively.
• Distinguish a concession paragraph from a contradiction. The essay should remain coherent.
• Repeat keywords from the question to maintain relevance and signposting.
• Prefer precise, calm prose over flair, cliche, or template phrasing.
• If the prompt hinges on "today", "increasingly", or another unstable qualifier, browse for current examples.
• If the user asks for a full essay under exam conditions, prefer a clean 4-body-paragraph structure over excessive complexity.

Common Question Types

• To what extent / How far do you agree
  • Build a clearly qualified thesis.
• Assess / Evaluate
  • Judge effectiveness, value, or validity using criteria.
• Discuss
  • Consider both sides seriously before reaching a judgement.
• How true
  • Test the claim against exceptions and present-day realities.
• Does X undermine Y
  • Examine both harm and possible benefits before concluding.
• Should
  • Weigh ethics, practicality, and consequences.

Output Sequence

When guiding the full process, default to this order:

1. Restate the question in simpler terms.
2. Identify key words and qualifiers.
3. List fundamental principles in conflict.
4. List important tensions to explore.
5. State a provisional thesis.
6. Give 3-4 topic sentences.
7. Suggest examples for each paragraph.
8. Draft the introduction.
9. Draft the body paragraphs.
10. Draft the conclusion.
11. Review and tighten.

Tone Adaptation

• Default to a register suitable for Singaporean or British examiners: clear, measured, precise, and analytically restrained.
• For a British-leaning examiner, write in a more measured and qualified register. Prefer restrained claims, cooler verbs, and fewer moral absolutes.
• For a Singaporean examiner, keep the prose clear and disciplined, use Singapore examples when relevant, and show sensitivity to local context without becoming parochial.

Review Mode

When reviewing a GP essay, prioritise:

• thesis drift
• weak qualification
• vague or irrelevant examples
• counterarguments that are missing or underdeveloped
• paragraphs that describe more than they argue
• grammar or diction issues that blur meaning
• introductions that overperform stylistically but understate the thesis
• conclusions that merely repeat instead of judging

Reference File

Read references/gp-essay-guide.md when you need topic-agnostic planning prompts, question-type reminders, the PERMS/SPERM note, or the source list that informed this skill.