PS Help Please! Forum

[pdftlvson]

.

[kublaikahn]

Is your theme that you have learned through interacting with people from other cultures how to empathize and relate to people? I think it is a suitable theme to write about, but I would tighten it up by going the more focused route. I just don't think your argument to that end is very strong. I think you could be more expressive by talking about how much you enjoyed connecting with people that are so different than you.

I sense that those experiences were meaningful to you but I just don't get to share that emotion with you as the reader. I expect all three accomplishments will be in the application somewhere, so just pick one and tell me a story.

I also don't feel like the empathy theme ties in well to international law. Having traveled overseas and having empathy is not, in itself, a valid reason to pursue international law, IMO.

Resist the urge to add flowery words. Is "incredibly diverse" more informative than "diverse"?

[kublaikahn]

Using the third story, try this...
In preparation to study in Italy, I took an intensive Italian language course with six other unique individuals. Among the seven of us, we represented six countries from four contintents speaking five different native languages. The class started slowly as we learned to read each other, but developed rapidly as we all began sharing our unique experiences. My excitement crested as I realized my opportunity to improve my Italian was far outweighed by my opportunity to see the world through my classmates eyes. Even though our opinions and perspectives on many issues were vastly different, I learned that when someone sees the world differently than I do the synthesis (better word here) of our disparate views makes the picture clearer, not less so.

[pdftlvson]

This was really helpful! Thank you very much!

[sold123]

The two examples you give are too general, and lack real content. This is not to say that those two experiences do not have real content that affected you, but to say that the way you present them are not specific or convincing enough.

The first example is weak because you never explain how the whole process led you to your revelation. You cannot simply tell your reader that you learned that, you must show the reader how the process occurred.

The second example is weak because you do the same thing. You describe where everyone is from, and allude to foundational conversations that shape your worldview, but where are these interesting topics? What are they? How do they coincide with your beginning sentiments? Find a way to tie either the first or second example to your reaction to the first quote.