Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
please rate my AWA section. [#permalink]
03 Jan 2011, 21:00
The following appeared as part of an annual report sent to stockholders by Olympic Foods, a processor of frozen foods: “Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize profits.” Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
The argument is a bit far fetched. Witout mentioning its conspicuous assumptions, argument draws out conslusion on Olympic foods relying on evidence given for colour films. Colour films and food are two completely different consumer products. This makes the use of evidence in the argument questionable.In short, the argument presently is lame and inane.
Firstly, technological advancement of the colour film industry as a whole resulted in low cost of processing of colour films. No evidence is presented for the technological leap taken by the Olympic Foods.Besides technology, the huge increase in the scale of operations in colour film industry helped it achieve lower costs. Again no similar achievement is mentioned as regards to Olympic Foods. Infact, the argument does not mention even a single effort taken by Olympic Foods to reduce the cost.
Secondly, to compare two different consumer products is as illogical as comparing cricket and football. Food industry is presently plagued with environmental issues whereas the colour film industry is grappling with technological advancements which makes the use of film itself obsolete. Cost of processing in Foods Industry have gone up due to inreasing restrictions and regulations by Food Authorities. Thus drawing parallel between these two industries is highly illogical.
Even though the argument has many flaws it can be improved if it makes a few changes.Mentioning some efforts to reduce costs of Olympic Foods will strengthen the argument.Moreover, stating technological advancement in packaging of Olympic Foods will make the argument more logical since it draws a parallel with the colour film industry.
To sum up, the present argument is unconvincing. But if the changes endorsed above takes place the argument can be strengthened.
-------------------------------------------------- Issue: "It is unrealistic to expect individual nations to make, independently, the sacrifices necessary to conserve energy. International leadership and worldwide cooperation are essential if we expect to protect the world's energy resources for future generations."
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
Energy crisis is an international issue. Its affects each and every nation.Hence, it is logical to deal with it using a more collaborative approach between different nations.On the other side,many analysts consider international summits futile.But I still believe that this approach would reap much better results than would an independent approach.
The chief reason for my view is that a collaborative approach leads to better utilization of resources.For instance USA, biggest consumer of energy, has the most advanced research labs working on the energy crisis.Its technology can be used effectively in underdeveloped and developing nations.If these countries lower their energy consumption levels, then USA itslef,under the pressure of international summits, will mend its ways.
Secondly, this wordlwide leadership and co-operation help in transparent accounting of each and every nation. They help in chartering agendas for each nation to achieve without any bias. This helps a lot in achieveing concrete results as they are used to mould the future policies of many nations. Infact, to say international summits are futile would be exaggeration.Benefits of the Montreal Protocol are well documented.
In sum, collaborative approach seems to have more potential than an independent one. International summits have and will continue to achieve substantial progress.
Re: please rate my AWA section. [#permalink]
04 Jan 2011, 14:53
This post received KUDOS
Argument Essay: 4/6
You do a perfect job of analyzing the argument and pointing out the assumptions. However, your tone is a bit too informal and aggressive for this essay type. Try to avoid calling the argument "lame," "inane," or likening it to other dumb moves. You are of course right, it is a dumb argument, and it always will be; but focus instead on the gaps in logic, not on its inherent wrongness. Try this structure: "The author states that ______. However, this assumes that _________. Instead, it could be that ________." This general approach will keep your essay's tone more measured and more on-point. Also, avoid bringing up new issues: the decline of the color film industry, for instance, in your third paragraph does not help your argument. The point you need to make is simply that information about one industry cannot necessarily relate to another; make that point, and no other point, and move on. Overall, your logical analysis of the prompt is excellent, the organization of the essay is clear, and your strengtheners and concluding sentence are excellent. Lightening your tone and focusing on the lack of evidence to bridge logical gaps will improve your score.
Issue Essay: 4/6
This essay, too, is clearly thought-out and well-structured. You do an excellent job of presenting your side clearly early on and sticking to the issue and to your opinion, thus avoiding the most common errors made on the Issue Essay. However, you give the points a little shorter shrift than you should. A more thorough discussion in each of your two body paragraphs of the reasons for your belief will raise your score. Simply mentioning an example isn't enough; the GMAT wants to see you expand on the example and prove that it relates, in fact, to your point. In addition, although you do mention the alternative perspective in your introductory paragraph, a deeper refutation of this point will strengthen your essay. An addition body paragraph structured as follows will help: "Some argue that _______. However, they fail to consider that ________. [etc]"
Re: please rate my AWA section. [#permalink]
04 Jan 2011, 20:13
It will definitely help. Will try using less adjectives or lets say moderate adjectives in argument section to make it less aggressive.
And yeah you rightly pointed.. out.. examples in essay were not developed.. a harmless line or two in each para.. just to add content rather than any specific point might make them thorough discussion.
and yeah i ran out of time that's why could not write that para on alternative perspective.
(and i do have a lot of spelling mistakes as well)
Re: please rate my AWA section.
04 Jan 2011, 20:13