I will be honest with you. This is a very weak essay.
There are two components to a good argument essay, grammar and content.Grammar
Your grammar is weak and needs improvement. Your essay is full of incorrect word usage, strange idioms, sentence structure etc. I know its tough for non native speakers, but I suggest you spend more time reading quality english sources (newspapers, books, websites etc). I am not an expert on AWA scoring, but even if your content is rock solid, you will not score a 6.0 with badly written english.
But I feel the real issue with your essay is the content, not the grammar.Content
You fail to really attack the argument itself. You make a ton of few very general "this argument is weak and not supported by its premises" statements, but never really tie those back into the argument. Basically there is a lot of generic, empty statements that don't add anything to your analysis. I've annotated my specific thoughts in the attached word file. I feel like you have followed a template far too closely, and left in a lot of waffly wording that sounds good, but is meaningless.
I feel you only raise one genuine issue with the author's argument - "he is basing his statement on one survey". You state this, then do not delve into it at all! You go off on a complete tangent right after making a good point.
Your second paragraph regarding the number of workers is pretty weak. Essentially you are suggesting the survey methodology was wrong, when there is no real evidence that it was. You need to focus on the argument presented, and only bring in outside information to highlight flaws in the authors argument. You might raise an issue with the methodology as a secondary issue. I'm not saying its completely absurd to raise, but its definitely not the biggest flaw. You are better off giving some benefit of the doubt that the survey was fair and the methodology was correct.
I do not think you have fully appreciated the argument. What is the real
issue with this argument? Its that the conclusion talks about management issues
, but the survey talks about interest in restructuring and design of benefits.
You need to interpret "restructuring and design of benefits" as "job layoffs and job pay".
So the argument is saying that workers care about management issues, because they care about job layoffs and job pay! This is a very weak argument. Workers will always care about job layoffs and job pay because these issues directly affect them. Just because they care about these issues does not mean they care about the much broader 'management issues'.
This is the major flaw in the argument, and needs to be your first point. Your second paragraph might be some of those issues with relying on one survey, and that no information is provided on the survey methodology. I would then move into how the argument could be improved, and finish off by restating my view on the argument.
arg.docx [17.04 KiB]
Downloaded 162 times