AWA Score: 4.5-5 out of 6
I have used a GMAT AWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay.
Coherence and connectivity: 2.5/5
This rating corresponds to the flow of ideas and expressions from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analyzed. 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 are 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: 5/5
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocabulary 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!
Good Luckpkbiet wrote:
Q: Prompt: “According to a survey of 5,000 urban residents, the prevalence of stress headaches increases with educational level, so that stress headaches occur most often among people with graduate-school degrees. It is well established that, nationally, higher educational levels usually correspond with higher levels of income. Therefore, in marketing our new pain remedy, Omnilixir, we should send free samples primarily to graduate students and to people with graduate degrees, and we should concentrate on advertising in professional journals rather than in general interest magazines.”
Essay Format
The author debates that stress headaches are directly proportional to the higher education level category who directly fall under the ambit of higher income group. So, in order to market their new product Omnilixir, they should send free samples to students as well as graduate degree holders, and should advertise in the professional journals rather than in general. Stated in such a way, the author has misjudged many facts and failed to observe that the other associated facts such as anxiety, depressions, unwillingness, callousness of the survey samples. Stated and corroborated with the relevant facts, it would be too naive to draw conclusion and would be a leap of faith.
First, the author has stressed over the fact that stress increases with higher education level as per his sample of 5000 urban residents. This is totally devoid of the fact that author has failed to think that what if the sample are not interested in studies and want to do something else. Or for the fact what if post education in job, they fail to meet target and hurt sentiments of stakeholders. Much of the stress can also be attributed to the fact that work life balance in today environment. So all these factors are few examples which the author should have consider before arriving at conclusion that headaches often occur among people with higher education degrees.
Second, the author has also stated that since higher education categorically corresponds to higher income level group person . Stated in such a way, the discussion shows the childish approach of the author. There has been many evident that many industrialists happens to be dropouts as they were poised for something else. So judging the efficacy of samples on the basis of the education or level of income is really an uncaring approach, which is not at all justified. The author should have considered some other facts as well.
Third, the author has also suggested that while sending the free samples to the sample space of 5000 residents, they should also advertise parallels in the professional magazine, instead of general magazine. This step is again not mature enough as professional magazines though subscribed in office, professionals hardly find any time to flip through the pages, while general interest magazine can have a high ambit of customers who can be really helpful in the true feedback of the samples.
In conclusion, the argument remains flawed for the reasons cited above. The author needed to assimilate the facts and derive proper conclusion instead of jumping on judgement. Unless the matter would have been presented in a more judicious manner, any decision would be ignorant and the topic remains open for debate.