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:
WANTED: critic of my AWA [#permalink]
28 Mar 2014, 19:08
The following appeared in an article in the Grandview Beacon. "For many years the city of Grandview has provided annual funding for the Grandview Symphony. Last year, however, private contributions to the symphony increased by 200 percent and attendance at the symphony's concerts-in-the-park series doubled. The symphony has also announced an increase in ticket prices for next year. Given such developments, some city commissioners argue that the symphony can now be fully self-supporting, and they recommend that funding for the symphony be eliminated from next year's budget." Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The following assumption that the city of Grandview should scrap funding for the symphony from their budget all together is unwarranted. First of all, due to the increase in private contributions by 200% isn’t a valid reason that the city of Grandview should take away their monetary support. For instance, we don’t know anything about the person(s) wealth and if they are able to fund the symphony on a continual basis. What would strengthen the argument more is if the donating party’s monetary stance was elaborated on. Furthermore, we need to know if this private funding was a onetime instance. Additonally, we would need to know not only the donator’s financial status but the state of the economy. Is the economy on a downturn to the point that it would be difficult for donors to give on a regular basis? Second, the increase in the price of tickets doesn’t provide enough evidence that the symphony can be self supporting. For instance, we are not given any solid detailed information on the city of Grandview. If Grandview was known for their poor financial stability than this argument of increased in ticket prices would be unwarranted. Also, is this city even known for having an affinity for the symphony. Sure, you can raise the price of tickets but if the majority of residents in Grandview don’t enjoy the symphony then it would be hard to stay afloat without financial backing from the city. Therefore to strengthen the argument we need to know the financial state of the city: are they poor, wealthy? Also, we need to know if the citizens are more likely to frequent symphony’s than any other sort of entertainment (theater etc.) Third, the increase in crowd size is a poor indicator of whether the city should pull away from providing monetary support. For instance, perhaps in time the city may have other options of entertainment ( i.e. new building being built) that may funnel patrons to other establishments. In other words, is the symphony the only source of entertainment in this city are there other entertainment outlets. Furthermore, if the economy is in a difficult period than citizens may not frequent the symphony as much. So in order to strengthen this argument we need to know if there are other options for entertainment than could mean decrease in attendance. We also need to know the state of the economy can patrons afford to continually go to symphonies. In conclusion, the assumption that the city of Grandview can withdraw any monetary support form the symphony based on private funding, ticket prices, crowd size is unwarranted.
WANTED: critic of my AWA
28 Mar 2014, 19:08