Joined: 23 Feb 2012
, given: 2
New to AWA...Would appreciate a ballpark score on my essay! [#permalink]
03 Apr 2012, 12:36
I just started preparing for the AWA and have would like to get ballpark figure of my essay score. Please tell me what you would give this essay from an MGMAT practice test. Thank you so much.
Analyze an Argument:
"Company X's latest model of digital camera to be released next month, the TR12, is being promoted as the most portable, user-friendly digital camera available, and also an excellent bargain. It can be expected to live up to these claims, because Company X's previous model, the TR11, was universally lauded as setting the standard in these areas last year."
The article in the consumer-electronics magazine claims that the newest release of Company X's digital camera, the TR12, is a leader in several key areas because its predecessor, the TR11, set the standard in each. Though TR11 may have been a successful, capable camera, it cannot be used as the basis for the quality of an entirely new model, the TR12. The argument is flawed as it bases its argument off of several unsubstantiated assumptions, and overlooks factors of a dynamic, changing market environment.
First, the argument assumes that with time always comes progress, though this is not always the case. Though the TR11 was lauded in areas like usability and portability, it is not necessarily true that the same reasoning holds true to the TR12. The TR12 is an entirely different model, and the features mentioned above may not have been drastically improved or modified. The company may even have stagnated after receiving such praise, possibly losing incentive to further innovate. The argument may be strengthened if it solidly provided facts relating the TR12 to the TR11 on the progress made price, usability, and portability.
Next, the article fails to consider potential competition and new entrants to the market. In the time between the release of the TR11 and TR12, other makers of digital cameras may have made strides in the areas Company X once dominated. The success of the TR11 may have provided incentive to other companies to invest in the research and development of more user-friendly, more portable, and cheaper digital cameras. Even if these features of the TR12 are comparable to the TR11, another company's camera may be superior to both. The argument should refer to Company X's dominance over competitors' products to further validate its claim about the TR12.
Finally, the argument is faulty in the vagueness of its wording. The article claims that the TR12 is an "excellent bargain". Over time, rapid advances in technology cause prices to decline; what may have been an excellent bargain on the TR11 a few months ago will appear overpriced to a consumer now. In this argument, the claim that the TR12 is a "bargain" is made relative to the price of the TR11, which was presumably created a considerable amount of time ago. To strengthen its claim, the article should provide a quantitative financial estimate of the price of the camera, and either compare it to competitors' prices or justify the charge.
Ultimately, the argument makes several hasty assumptions outlined above. It oversimplifies complexities that come with changing times, like new competitors and changing prices of technology, and makes a claim that is unfounded on hard facts. Further, it makes a faulty analogy to a previous model, and draws unsubstantiated comparisons. The argument can be improved by providing more concrete and quantitative data. Only after this is accomplished can more merit be extracted from the article.