|
|
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.
02 Nov 2017, 15:36
Kudos
Bookmarks
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.”
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
Response:
The staff member who wrote the letter to the office of admissions at Argent University makes the statement that an increase in advertising and recruiting focus on the economics department will increase the enrollment at the school. While the statement is supported by a “nationwide survey”, the staff member fails to provide sufficient evidence to give the argument good standing. While a greater focus on the economics department may indeed lead to higher enrollment, the author of the letter does not appear to consider the criteria of the survey or the impacts that diverted focus would have on the other areas of the school.
First off, the survey that is being quoted as proof was created with parameters that are unknown to us and the office of admissions. It is important to understand who was surveyed, how many people were polled, what other questions were asked, etc. Speaking from firsthand experience in switching majors in my undergraduate career, there are many reasons why one would choose to pursue a particular field. These reasons range from simple factors like job prospects or interest/passion to unique factors like primary location of work to curriculum credit requirements. Without knowing more about the criteria of the survey, it is hard to take the staff member’s opinion as solidly supported.
Second, and more important to the office of admissions and management of the school, the author does not consider what effect an increased focus on economics would have on other departments at the school. For example, if the economics department is already the strongest department at the school and is the major that the school is known for, there is a strong possibility that extra attention will not dramatically change enrollment. In fact, this may have a reverse affect and turn away students who wanted to attend the school for other majors and now feel that they will not get the attention they need. In addition, some of the other majors at the school may be considered up-and-coming career fields with bountiful job prospects in the near, but not immediate, future. If the school were to divert resources away from these majors they could lose potential future enrollment growth and the opportunity to grow the university’s reputation.
While current students may hold job prospects as their top priority when choosing a major, focusing on one department in a university could have negative effects on the university as a whole. The staff member who wrote the letter does not consider other departments in their argument or the validity of the survey itself. Without further study on the plus/delta of an increased focus on economics, the staff member’s suggestion should not be followed.
“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.”
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
Response:
The staff member who wrote the letter to the office of admissions at Argent University makes the statement that an increase in advertising and recruiting focus on the economics department will increase the enrollment at the school. While the statement is supported by a “nationwide survey”, the staff member fails to provide sufficient evidence to give the argument good standing. While a greater focus on the economics department may indeed lead to higher enrollment, the author of the letter does not appear to consider the criteria of the survey or the impacts that diverted focus would have on the other areas of the school.
First off, the survey that is being quoted as proof was created with parameters that are unknown to us and the office of admissions. It is important to understand who was surveyed, how many people were polled, what other questions were asked, etc. Speaking from firsthand experience in switching majors in my undergraduate career, there are many reasons why one would choose to pursue a particular field. These reasons range from simple factors like job prospects or interest/passion to unique factors like primary location of work to curriculum credit requirements. Without knowing more about the criteria of the survey, it is hard to take the staff member’s opinion as solidly supported.
Second, and more important to the office of admissions and management of the school, the author does not consider what effect an increased focus on economics would have on other departments at the school. For example, if the economics department is already the strongest department at the school and is the major that the school is known for, there is a strong possibility that extra attention will not dramatically change enrollment. In fact, this may have a reverse affect and turn away students who wanted to attend the school for other majors and now feel that they will not get the attention they need. In addition, some of the other majors at the school may be considered up-and-coming career fields with bountiful job prospects in the near, but not immediate, future. If the school were to divert resources away from these majors they could lose potential future enrollment growth and the opportunity to grow the university’s reputation.
While current students may hold job prospects as their top priority when choosing a major, focusing on one department in a university could have negative effects on the university as a whole. The staff member who wrote the letter does not consider other departments in their argument or the validity of the survey itself. Without further study on the plus/delta of an increased focus on economics, the staff member’s suggestion should not be followed.
Moderators:
188 posts
