Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
13 Mar 2021, 11:05
Kudos
Bookmarks
PROMPT*********
The following appeared in a letter from a staff member in the office of admissions at Argent University:
“The most recent nationwide surveys show that undergraduates choose their major field primarily based on their perception of job prospects in that field. At our university, economics is now the most popular major, so students must perceive this field as having the best job prospects. Therefore, we can increase our enrollment if we focus our advertising and recruiting on publicizing the accomplishments of our best-known economics professors and the success of our economics graduates in finding employment.”
RESPONSE*******
In the letter from the office of admissions at Argent University, a staff member claims that focusing advertising and recruiting on the accomplishments of their best-know economics professors and success of the University’s economics graduates in finding employment will increase enrollment numbers. This claim has weak support for reasons that shall be discussed in further detail below.
First, the foundation of the argument is a nationwide survey of undergraduates that claims major field is chosen primarily based on perception of job prospect. This nationwide survey has no broader context - we as the reader are unaware of the population of the survey as a function of the total national undergraduate population as well as the diversity within that population. A nationwide survey with 100 participants is much different than a nationwide survey with 100,000 participants if there is a total of 1 million undergraduates in the nation; there is no context of how representative this survey finding truly is of the total undergraduate population.
Second, the staff member claims that because economics is the most popular major at their univeristy, students must perceive this as the field with the best job prospects. The foundation of this argument is based on the survey, which in itself is flawed as decribed above. However, even if there is evidence to support the survey is representative of the nationwide undergraduate population, the staff member neglects a key statement from the studies conclusion - the students primarily choose their major field based off of job prospects in the field. The use of the word “primarily” implies that job prospect is a large factor in the selection of a major field, but is not the only factor in this selection. It could be that, given all other factors are equal, a student uses job prospect to make the final decision on their major field. However, if other factors are not equal in the comparison of major fields, these factors may also provide weight into their final decision since job prospect is not the only factor shown to influence a final decision.
Third, there is weak support that focusing on publishing accomplishments of the university’s best-known economics professors will boost enrollment. Even while assuming all other factors in this argument are true (students do truly select based on job prospects), the accomplishments of the economics professors are largely unrelated to a student’s perception of job prospect in the field of economics. A successful professor does not equate to a successful student, and a successful student does not necessarily equate to better job prospects. The accomplishments of the professors could help boost the esteem of the college and make it appear more elite, but this does give any information to prospective students on their job prospects after graduating.
With the reasons outlined above, this argument is shown to need stronger evidence and support in its claim of focusing advertising and recruitment to increase enrollment. The office of admissions at Argent University should re-evaluate their approach to increase enrollment at their university.
The following appeared in a letter from a staff member in the office of admissions at Argent University:
“The most recent nationwide surveys show that undergraduates choose their major field primarily based on their perception of job prospects in that field. At our university, economics is now the most popular major, so students must perceive this field as having the best job prospects. Therefore, we can increase our enrollment if we focus our advertising and recruiting on publicizing the accomplishments of our best-known economics professors and the success of our economics graduates in finding employment.”
RESPONSE*******
In the letter from the office of admissions at Argent University, a staff member claims that focusing advertising and recruiting on the accomplishments of their best-know economics professors and success of the University’s economics graduates in finding employment will increase enrollment numbers. This claim has weak support for reasons that shall be discussed in further detail below.
First, the foundation of the argument is a nationwide survey of undergraduates that claims major field is chosen primarily based on perception of job prospect. This nationwide survey has no broader context - we as the reader are unaware of the population of the survey as a function of the total national undergraduate population as well as the diversity within that population. A nationwide survey with 100 participants is much different than a nationwide survey with 100,000 participants if there is a total of 1 million undergraduates in the nation; there is no context of how representative this survey finding truly is of the total undergraduate population.
Second, the staff member claims that because economics is the most popular major at their univeristy, students must perceive this as the field with the best job prospects. The foundation of this argument is based on the survey, which in itself is flawed as decribed above. However, even if there is evidence to support the survey is representative of the nationwide undergraduate population, the staff member neglects a key statement from the studies conclusion - the students primarily choose their major field based off of job prospects in the field. The use of the word “primarily” implies that job prospect is a large factor in the selection of a major field, but is not the only factor in this selection. It could be that, given all other factors are equal, a student uses job prospect to make the final decision on their major field. However, if other factors are not equal in the comparison of major fields, these factors may also provide weight into their final decision since job prospect is not the only factor shown to influence a final decision.
Third, there is weak support that focusing on publishing accomplishments of the university’s best-known economics professors will boost enrollment. Even while assuming all other factors in this argument are true (students do truly select based on job prospects), the accomplishments of the economics professors are largely unrelated to a student’s perception of job prospect in the field of economics. A successful professor does not equate to a successful student, and a successful student does not necessarily equate to better job prospects. The accomplishments of the professors could help boost the esteem of the college and make it appear more elite, but this does give any information to prospective students on their job prospects after graduating.
With the reasons outlined above, this argument is shown to need stronger evidence and support in its claim of focusing advertising and recruitment to increase enrollment. The office of admissions at Argent University should re-evaluate their approach to increase enrollment at their university.
13 Mar 2021, 16:42
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi. Interesting to see your second essay 
Please do not forget to use the Chineseburnt AWA Template!
https://gmatclub.com/forum/how-to-get-6 ... 64327.html
AWA Score: 5 to 5.5 out of 6!
I have used a GMATAWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay. I think some of your long introduction has confused the essay grader since your "Firstly appeared only in the third paragraph". I tried deleting your first 2 paragraphs and that bumped the score up to 4.5 though it bumped the cohesion score down to 3.5. In any case, it proves that MORE is not always BETTER
Coherence and connectivity: 5/5
This rating corresponds to the flow of idea and expression from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analysed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.
Paragraph structure and formation: 4.5/5
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs is evaluated. To score well on this parameter, it is important to organize the attempt into paragraphs. Preferable to follow the convention of leaving a line blank at the end of each paragraph, to make the software aware of the structure of the essay.
Vocabulary and word expression: 4/5
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocaubulary possessed by the candidate basis the word and expression usage. There are no extra- points for bombastic word-usage. Simple is the best form of suave!
I have used a GMATAWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay. I think some of your long introduction has confused the essay grader since your "Firstly appeared only in the third paragraph". I tried deleting your first 2 paragraphs and that bumped the score up to 4.5 though it bumped the cohesion score down to 3.5. In any case, it proves that MORE is not always BETTER
Coherence and connectivity: 5/5
This rating corresponds to the flow of idea and expression from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analysed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.
Paragraph structure and formation: 4.5/5
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs is evaluated. To score well on this parameter, it is important to organize the attempt into paragraphs. Preferable to follow the convention of leaving a line blank at the end of each paragraph, to make the software aware of the structure of the essay.
Vocabulary and word expression: 4/5
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocaubulary possessed by the candidate basis the word and expression usage. There are no extra- points for bombastic word-usage. Simple is the best form of suave!
Please do not forget to use the Chineseburnt AWA Template! https://gmatclub.com/forum/how-to-get-6 ... 64327.html
Moderator:
