Writing Samples

Example 1 Introduction:

America’s experience with immigration has rested in its ability to absorb and assimilate

large numbers of immigrants from widely varying ethnic, religious, socioeconomic, linguistic, and

educational backgrounds. Yet, Hispanic immigration calls that ability into question. This is true for

many reasons. Hispanic immigration is unique in many ways that give immigrants fewer incentives

to assimilate. Additionally, modern notions of multiculturalism and the structure of the American

economy discourage assimilation generally, and Hispanic assimilation especially because of both the

large number of Hispanic immigrants and their relatively poorer socio-economic status. Moreover,

recent findings on assimilation reveal that assimilation may hardly be desirable.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, the slow rate of assimilation of America’s Hispanic immigrants is grounded

in several factors. Many of the ways in which Hispanic immigration is unique contribute to

Hispanics’ unprecedentedly slow rates of assimilation. Popular views on multiculturalism also

contribute to slower cultural assimilation, while the segmented nature of the contemporary American

economy inhibits rapid upward economic assimilation. These realities affect the comparatively

larger and poorer population of Hispanic populations disproportionately. For these reasons,

Hispanics lag behind both their non-Hispanic contemporaries and their historical counterparts in

terms of assimilation. Moreover, recent findings on assimilation bring into question whether

assimilation is even desirable. The maintenance of Hispanic traditional culture is in many important

ways healthier, while the preservation of close-knit Hispanic communities may likewise be better

economically than assimilation. Thus, the slower rate of Hispanic assimilation is grounded in the

uniqueness of Hispanic immigration, contemporary realities of American attitudes and economic

segmentation, as well as the negative consequences of assimilation. Simply put, it appears that

Hispanic immigrants might do better to resist assimilation that to embrace it.

Writing Samples

Example 2 Introduction:

The United States underwent profound changes in the decades following the Civil War.

Radical Republicans, in control of the national government, had successfully introduced liberal

measures to guarantee equality and freedom from discrimination to African Americans. Yet, by 1877,

the window of opportunity for Reconstruction was closed. While African Americans technically

retained freedom, the power to uphold that freedom had been systematically undermined by a series of

successive court decisions that narrowly interpreted laws in such a way as to maximize legalistic

loopholes. This, in effect, rendered the federal government a passive accomplice to the system of local

race-based segregation laws known as the Jim Crow system.

Conclusion:

There were two key results of these legal developments, each a pillar of what has become

known as the Jim Crow system. The first was segregation, the barring of black Southerners from

accessing public facilities, including some schools and hospitals. Even private facilities, such as

waiting rooms, rest rooms, restaurants, and movie theaters remained segregated. The second pillar was

disenfranchisement, the effective denial of voting rights. This was accomplished through literacy and

understanding examinations, special poll taxes, and “grandfather” qualifications. Thus, the legal

judgments following the post-war radical Civil Rights legislation effectively rendered the national

government passive to the perpetuation of local, segregated racial hierarchy in many US states. This

reality reinforced racism, and indefinitely delayed the true abolition of a racially polarized nation.

Beyond local issues in the American south, allowing systematic racial segregation certainly paralleled

and perhaps reinforced the attitudes behind other race-based policies, such as immigration restriction.
Writing Samples

Example 3 Introduction:

Randolph Bourne, an early proponent of multiculturalism, wrote on the topic of immigration

in 1916: “Whatever American nationalism turns out to be, we see already that it will have a color

richer…[W]e…have been building up the first international nation…All our idealisms must be those

of future social goals in which all can participate…It must be a future America, on which all can unite,

which pulls us irresistibly toward it, as we understand each other more warmly.” i To many modern

Americans, Bourne’s philosophy seems obvious and universal. However, in historical reality, the

development of American immigration history through 1924 was characterized by increasing

regulation, and finally restriction, cumulating in the 1924 Immigration Act. How and why did this

development occur? The force of nativism, a reaction to increased immigration, together with certain

key events, provided the impetus for increased restriction and ensured that such restriction was based

on the premise of hierarchical racial desirability.

Conclusion:

Returning to Bourne, it is no longer difficult to understand why, based on historical

circumstances, so many of his contemporaries disagreed with him. Facing what many Americans

perceived to be the morally, genetically, economically, politically, and socially disastrous

consequences of non-Anglo-Saxon immigration, fewer and fewer Americans empathized with

Bourne’s thesis. He replied, “Surely we cannot be certain of our spiritual democracy when…we fly

into a panic at the first sight of their own will… as if we wanted Americanization to take place on our

own terms, and not by the consent of the governed.” ii But, by 1924, in response to such nativist panic,

that was exactly what the US government attempted to do through race-based restriction.
Writing Samples

Example 4 Introduction:

For many decades, Mexicans have constituted the single largest American immigrant group.

With a highly distinctive cultural identity, Mexican-Americans defy simple categorization. In the

period of 1924-1964, Mexican immigrants in the United States forged a unique cultural identity as

Mexican-Americans; they neither remained foreigners nor simply assimilated with time. Rather, they

carved out a new identity in response to economic pressures, Americanization schemes, racist

attitudes, segregation, Mexican nationalism campaigns, shifting religious tendencies, employment and

consumption opportunities, all of which were influenced by key foreign policy decisions of the US and

Mexico.

Conclusion:

In this fascinating process of Mexican-American identity formation, economic pressures,

Americanization and Mexicanization schemes, racist attitudes, segregation, religious trends,

employment and consumption opportunities all contributed a complex and interconnected way to

shape Mexican-American cultural identity. Mexican and American foreign policy decisions heavily

influenced these factors, leaving Mexican-Americans caught “between two worlds,” one of Mexican

traditionalism, and the other of total assimilation. Thus, Mexican-American cultural identity was

born.
i
Randolph Bourne, “Transnational America” (1916), p. 60-61.
ii
Randolph Bourne, “Transnational America,” p. 59.