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.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
10 Aug 2020, 07:35
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi Guys
I am taking the GMAT tomorrow and need someone to evaluate an essay for me.
I would be so grateful if you could tell me the points I missed and any other pointers on acing the exam.
Thanks!
The following appeared in an article in a college departmental newsletter
“Professor Taylor of Jones University is promoting a model of foreign language instruction in which students receive ten weeks of intensive training, then go abroad to live with families for ten weeks. The superiority of the model, Professor Taylor contends, is proved by the results of a study in which foreign language tests given to students at 25 other colleges show that first-year foreign language students at Jones speak more fluently after only ten to twenty weeks in the program than do nine out of ten foreign language majors elsewhere at the time of their graduation.”
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.
My Answer-
In the argument, a college department newsletter is promoting a new model of language instruction by Professor Taylor Jones in which students receive ten weeks of intensive training, then go abroad to live with families for ten weeks. The professor claims that his model of instruction is superior based on the results of a study in which foreign language tests given to students at 25 other colleges show that first-year foreign language students at Jones speak more fluently after only ten to twenty weeks in the program than do nine out of ten foreign language majors elsewhere at the time of their graduation. Though the argument seems compelling at face value its conclusion is ultimately untenable because of the following reasons.
Firstly, the argument does not mention that the students from Jones University who were a part of the study were instructed using the new model that Professor Taylor is recommending. It is also possible that the students at Jones University were not complete beginners at the commencement of the program. In addition to this, the argument must take into account the degree of similarity of the foreign languages that the students were learning to their native language since a native speaker of Portuguese would pick up Spanish more quickly than an Indian native learning Mandarin or Russian-Languages that have a different script from their native language.
Secondly, the argument does not state that the students competing with each other were evaluated based on the same language, the results of the study would not make sense if the fluency of a student learning french is compared to the fluency of a student learning Mandarin since each language has a different learning curve for non-native speakers.
Thirdly, the argument must consider how the 25 colleges that were considered against the recommended Program were ranked with respect to Jones prior to the introduction of the new model of instruction. The author has not ruled out the possibility that the students at Jones University performed better than the students at the other tested colleges even with their older model of instruction.
In conclusion, the statistics cited in the article provide little support to the conclusion. To strengthen the argument the author must show that the students were tested identically and that the universities were comparable. The author must also establish a causal relationship between the introduction of the new program and the outperformance of the students at Jones University by eliminating all other potential causes for the statistics cited.
I am taking the GMAT tomorrow and need someone to evaluate an essay for me.
I would be so grateful if you could tell me the points I missed and any other pointers on acing the exam.
Thanks!
The following appeared in an article in a college departmental newsletter
“Professor Taylor of Jones University is promoting a model of foreign language instruction in which students receive ten weeks of intensive training, then go abroad to live with families for ten weeks. The superiority of the model, Professor Taylor contends, is proved by the results of a study in which foreign language tests given to students at 25 other colleges show that first-year foreign language students at Jones speak more fluently after only ten to twenty weeks in the program than do nine out of ten foreign language majors elsewhere at the time of their graduation.”
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.
My Answer-
In the argument, a college department newsletter is promoting a new model of language instruction by Professor Taylor Jones in which students receive ten weeks of intensive training, then go abroad to live with families for ten weeks. The professor claims that his model of instruction is superior based on the results of a study in which foreign language tests given to students at 25 other colleges show that first-year foreign language students at Jones speak more fluently after only ten to twenty weeks in the program than do nine out of ten foreign language majors elsewhere at the time of their graduation. Though the argument seems compelling at face value its conclusion is ultimately untenable because of the following reasons.
Firstly, the argument does not mention that the students from Jones University who were a part of the study were instructed using the new model that Professor Taylor is recommending. It is also possible that the students at Jones University were not complete beginners at the commencement of the program. In addition to this, the argument must take into account the degree of similarity of the foreign languages that the students were learning to their native language since a native speaker of Portuguese would pick up Spanish more quickly than an Indian native learning Mandarin or Russian-Languages that have a different script from their native language.
Secondly, the argument does not state that the students competing with each other were evaluated based on the same language, the results of the study would not make sense if the fluency of a student learning french is compared to the fluency of a student learning Mandarin since each language has a different learning curve for non-native speakers.
Thirdly, the argument must consider how the 25 colleges that were considered against the recommended Program were ranked with respect to Jones prior to the introduction of the new model of instruction. The author has not ruled out the possibility that the students at Jones University performed better than the students at the other tested colleges even with their older model of instruction.
In conclusion, the statistics cited in the article provide little support to the conclusion. To strengthen the argument the author must show that the students were tested identically and that the universities were comparable. The author must also establish a causal relationship between the introduction of the new program and the outperformance of the students at Jones University by eliminating all other potential causes for the statistics cited.
Moderators:
188 posts
