Forum Home > GMAT > Quantitative > Problem Solving (PS)
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.
Dec 1511:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease.
Dec 1608:00 AM PST
-11:59 PM PST
GMAT Club 12 Days of Christmas is a 4th Annual GMAT Club Winter Competition based on solving questions. This is the Winter GMAT competition on GMAT Club with an amazing opportunity to win over $40,000 worth of prizes!- Dec 17
09:00 AM PST
-10:00 AM PST
Join Manhattan Prep instructor Whitney Garner for a fun—and thorough—review of logic-based (non-math) problems, with a particular emphasis on Data Sufficiency and Two-Parts. - Dec 18
10:00 AM PST
-11:00 AM PST
Here is the essential guide to securing scholarships as an MBA student! In this video, we explore the various types of scholarships available, including need-based and merit-based options.
07 Jan 2014, 09:53
Kudos
Bookmarks
I did my first Essay to the topic presented in Manhattan GMAT Strategy Guide 1.
"The country of Tarquinia has a much higher rate of traffic accidents per person than its neighbors, and in the vast majority of cases one or more drivers is found to be at fault in the courts. Therefore, Tarquinia should abolish driver-side seatbelts, airbags, and other safety measures that protect the driver, while new cars should be installed with a spike on the steering column pointed at the driver's heart. These measures will eliminate traffic accidents in Tarquinia by motivating drivers to drive safely."
Essay
The author of the essay proposes to remove safety measures that protect the driver in cars and install a spike on the steering column in new cars in order to reduce traffic accidents. The point is flawed, in that the argument makes numerous unwarranted assumptions and illogical assertions.
First of all, the proposition of removing safety measures and installing dangerous spikes will increase the number of fatal accidents in which people die. As it is not stated in the argument w(h)ether those accidents are just causing little damages at the cars or result in death, the proposed measures will definitly increase the amount of fatal accidents.
Moreover the argument seems to lack in evaluating unforeseen consequences. Since in all new cars there has to be a spike installed and in all old cars the safety equipment has to be removed, it is not realistic that the industry and furthermore the people are willing to take this effort.
In any event the argument states that the proposed actions will eliminate traffic accidents. This conclusion takes a logical leap as the correlation between the changes in the car might not correlate to the causes of all traffic accidents. Unexpected actions can still cause the driver to have a crash. Hence the proposed actions will not eliminate all the traffic accidents.
In conclusion the argument fails to consider major issues undermining the proposed action to lead to the wished result. In fact it might worsen the situation due to an increase in fatal accidents or might have no impact at all. An other possible opportunity to reduce traffic accidents on Tarquinia’s streets it might help to evaluate the reasons why people are found (missing: guilty) at fault in the courts.
I finished reading, planning and writing after approximately 23 minutes, though the question was presented a few times before I was asked to work on it.
Could someone score my Essay and give me a few points to improve?
Italic written parts of the text are already detected as faults.
Thank you in advance!
"The country of Tarquinia has a much higher rate of traffic accidents per person than its neighbors, and in the vast majority of cases one or more drivers is found to be at fault in the courts. Therefore, Tarquinia should abolish driver-side seatbelts, airbags, and other safety measures that protect the driver, while new cars should be installed with a spike on the steering column pointed at the driver's heart. These measures will eliminate traffic accidents in Tarquinia by motivating drivers to drive safely."
Essay
The author of the essay proposes to remove safety measures that protect the driver in cars and install a spike on the steering column in new cars in order to reduce traffic accidents. The point is flawed, in that the argument makes numerous unwarranted assumptions and illogical assertions.
First of all, the proposition of removing safety measures and installing dangerous spikes will increase the number of fatal accidents in which people die. As it is not stated in the argument w(h)ether those accidents are just causing little damages at the cars or result in death, the proposed measures will definitly increase the amount of fatal accidents.
Moreover the argument seems to lack in evaluating unforeseen consequences. Since in all new cars there has to be a spike installed and in all old cars the safety equipment has to be removed, it is not realistic that the industry and furthermore the people are willing to take this effort.
In any event the argument states that the proposed actions will eliminate traffic accidents. This conclusion takes a logical leap as the correlation between the changes in the car might not correlate to the causes of all traffic accidents. Unexpected actions can still cause the driver to have a crash. Hence the proposed actions will not eliminate all the traffic accidents.
In conclusion the argument fails to consider major issues undermining the proposed action to lead to the wished result. In fact it might worsen the situation due to an increase in fatal accidents or might have no impact at all. An other possible opportunity to reduce traffic accidents on Tarquinia’s streets it might help to evaluate the reasons why people are found (missing: guilty) at fault in the courts.
Show SpoilerWord Readability evaluation
Words 285
Sentences 13
Words/Sentence 21.9
Flesch Reading Ease: 46.8
Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level: 12.0
Sentences 13
Words/Sentence 21.9
Flesch Reading Ease: 46.8
Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level: 12.0
I finished reading, planning and writing after approximately 23 minutes, though the question was presented a few times before I was asked to work on it.
Could someone score my Essay and give me a few points to improve?
Italic written parts of the text are already detected as faults.
Thank you in advance!
bharatdivvela
Joined: 17 Oct 2013
Last visit: 02 Jan 2024
Posts: 35
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 21
Schools: HEC Dec"18
GMAT Date: 02-04-2014
08 Jan 2014, 06:55
Kudos
Bookmarks
TheZezet
I did my first Essay to the topic presented in Manhattan GMAT Strategy Guide 1.
"The country of Tarquinia has a much higher rate of traffic accidents per person than its neighbors, and in the vast majority of cases one or more drivers is found to be at fault in the courts. Therefore, Tarquinia should abolish driver-side seatbelts, airbags, and other safety measures that protect the driver, while new cars should be installed with a spike on the steering column pointed at the driver's heart. These measures will eliminate traffic accidents in Tarquinia by motivating drivers to drive safely."
Essay
The author of the essay proposes to remove safety measures that protect the driver in cars and install a spike on the steering column in new cars in order to reduce traffic accidents. The point is flawed, in that the argument makes numerous unwarranted assumptions and illogical assertions.
First of all, the proposition of removing safety measures and installing dangerous spikes will increase the number of fatal accidents in which people die. As it is not stated in the argument w(h)ether those accidents are just causing little damages at the cars or result in death, the proposed measures will definitly increase the amount of fatal accidents.
Moreover the argument seems to lack in evaluating unforeseen consequences. Since in all new cars there has to be a spike installed and in all old cars the safety equipment has to be removed, it is not realistic that the industry and furthermore the people are willing to take this effort.
In any event the argument states that the proposed actions will eliminate traffic accidents. This conclusion takes a logical leap as the correlation between the changes in the car might not correlate to the causes of all traffic accidents. Unexpected actions can still cause the driver to have a crash. Hence the proposed actions will not eliminate all the traffic accidents.
In conclusion the argument fails to consider major issues undermining the proposed action to lead to the wished result. In fact it might worsen the situation due to an increase in fatal accidents or might have no impact at all. An other possible opportunity to reduce traffic accidents on Tarquinia’s streets it might help to evaluate the reasons why people are found (missing: guilty) at fault in the courts.
I finished reading, planning and writing after approximately 23 minutes, though the question was presented a few times before I was asked to work on it.
Could someone score my Essay and give me a few points to improve?
Italic written parts of the text are already detected as faults.
Thank you in advance!
"The country of Tarquinia has a much higher rate of traffic accidents per person than its neighbors, and in the vast majority of cases one or more drivers is found to be at fault in the courts. Therefore, Tarquinia should abolish driver-side seatbelts, airbags, and other safety measures that protect the driver, while new cars should be installed with a spike on the steering column pointed at the driver's heart. These measures will eliminate traffic accidents in Tarquinia by motivating drivers to drive safely."
Essay
The author of the essay proposes to remove safety measures that protect the driver in cars and install a spike on the steering column in new cars in order to reduce traffic accidents. The point is flawed, in that the argument makes numerous unwarranted assumptions and illogical assertions.
First of all, the proposition of removing safety measures and installing dangerous spikes will increase the number of fatal accidents in which people die. As it is not stated in the argument w(h)ether those accidents are just causing little damages at the cars or result in death, the proposed measures will definitly increase the amount of fatal accidents.
Moreover the argument seems to lack in evaluating unforeseen consequences. Since in all new cars there has to be a spike installed and in all old cars the safety equipment has to be removed, it is not realistic that the industry and furthermore the people are willing to take this effort.
In any event the argument states that the proposed actions will eliminate traffic accidents. This conclusion takes a logical leap as the correlation between the changes in the car might not correlate to the causes of all traffic accidents. Unexpected actions can still cause the driver to have a crash. Hence the proposed actions will not eliminate all the traffic accidents.
In conclusion the argument fails to consider major issues undermining the proposed action to lead to the wished result. In fact it might worsen the situation due to an increase in fatal accidents or might have no impact at all. An other possible opportunity to reduce traffic accidents on Tarquinia’s streets it might help to evaluate the reasons why people are found (missing: guilty) at fault in the courts.
Show SpoilerWord Readability evaluation
Words 285
Sentences 13
Words/Sentence 21.9
Flesch Reading Ease: 46.8
Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level: 12.0
Sentences 13
Words/Sentence 21.9
Flesch Reading Ease: 46.8
Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level: 12.0
I finished reading, planning and writing after approximately 23 minutes, though the question was presented a few times before I was asked to work on it.
Could someone score my Essay and give me a few points to improve?
Italic written parts of the text are already detected as faults.
Thank you in advance!
4-4.5
if it is ur first essay, yes u did a great job.
the paragraphs are a bit shorter than required.
you have to elaborate(more) the points raised.
PriyankGaur
Joined: 29 Jan 2019
Last visit: 28 Apr 2021
Posts: 10
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 40
Location: India
Schools: Darden '22 (D) ISB '21 (A)
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V39
10 May 2019, 08:46
Kudos
Bookmarks
My stab at the same topic; please let me know the areas of improvements. Thanks.
In his argument, the author states that since the country of Tarquinia has a much higher rate of traffic accidents as compared to its neighbors and the drivers are at fault in majority of cases, Tarquinia should abolish driver-side seatbelts, airbags and any other safety measures, while the new cars should be installed with a spike on the steering column pointed at driver’s heart. The author believes that such measures will eliminate traffic accidents. Both, the conclusion and the author’s line of reasoning are extreme. Stated in this way, the argument manipulates the facts and presents a distorted picture. Also, the author fails to provide evidence for key questions that could help make his argument more convincing.
First of all, the author mentions the higher rate of traffic accidents in Tarquinia as compared to its neighbors and immediately jumps to the conclusion that Tarquinia should abolish driver side seatbelts, airbags and any other protective measures, while installing the new cars with spike on steering column pointed at driver’s heart. Author’s line of reasoning is unsubstantiated as there is no evidence in the argument that the lower rates of traffic accidents in the neighboring countries is due to the measures proposed by the author. The lower accident rates in the neighboring countries can be due to multiple other reasons such as stricter traffic rules, stricter adherence to traffic rules etc.
Secondly, the assumption that replacing the safety measures on the driver’s side with a spike pointed at driver’s heart would help eliminate the accidents is far-fetched. The author does not lend any support to his claim that such a step would lead to a reduction in the rate of accidents. The installation of spikes can in fact increase the rate of accidents as now the driver would be more concerned about the spike pointed at his heart than other vehicles or pedestrians on the road. Moreover, a sudden movement like coughing or sneezing can be fatal for the drivers.
Thirdly, the author claims that the proposed steps would help eliminate the traffic accidents in Tarquinia by motivating the drivers to drive safely. Again, the author makes a claim that is a bit of a stretch. The proposed steps may or may not lead to a decrease in the number of traffic accidents but there is no evidence to believe that the accidents would be eliminated. As reasoned earlier, while motivating the drivers to drive safely, the proposed introduction of spikes introduces new challenges, such as driver’s concern about own his safety and sudden movements like coughing and sneezing that are not in driver’s control, which the author has failed to address in his argument.
In conclusion, the author has made a claim for which he fails to provide enough evidence. He has made some far-fetched assumptions for which the line of reasoning is not very strong. The argument could be made more air tight if the author addresses the questions that have been posed to the argument in the earlier passages. The author has left too much to speculation, which makes his argument vulnerable and open to debate.
In his argument, the author states that since the country of Tarquinia has a much higher rate of traffic accidents as compared to its neighbors and the drivers are at fault in majority of cases, Tarquinia should abolish driver-side seatbelts, airbags and any other safety measures, while the new cars should be installed with a spike on the steering column pointed at driver’s heart. The author believes that such measures will eliminate traffic accidents. Both, the conclusion and the author’s line of reasoning are extreme. Stated in this way, the argument manipulates the facts and presents a distorted picture. Also, the author fails to provide evidence for key questions that could help make his argument more convincing.
First of all, the author mentions the higher rate of traffic accidents in Tarquinia as compared to its neighbors and immediately jumps to the conclusion that Tarquinia should abolish driver side seatbelts, airbags and any other protective measures, while installing the new cars with spike on steering column pointed at driver’s heart. Author’s line of reasoning is unsubstantiated as there is no evidence in the argument that the lower rates of traffic accidents in the neighboring countries is due to the measures proposed by the author. The lower accident rates in the neighboring countries can be due to multiple other reasons such as stricter traffic rules, stricter adherence to traffic rules etc.
Secondly, the assumption that replacing the safety measures on the driver’s side with a spike pointed at driver’s heart would help eliminate the accidents is far-fetched. The author does not lend any support to his claim that such a step would lead to a reduction in the rate of accidents. The installation of spikes can in fact increase the rate of accidents as now the driver would be more concerned about the spike pointed at his heart than other vehicles or pedestrians on the road. Moreover, a sudden movement like coughing or sneezing can be fatal for the drivers.
Thirdly, the author claims that the proposed steps would help eliminate the traffic accidents in Tarquinia by motivating the drivers to drive safely. Again, the author makes a claim that is a bit of a stretch. The proposed steps may or may not lead to a decrease in the number of traffic accidents but there is no evidence to believe that the accidents would be eliminated. As reasoned earlier, while motivating the drivers to drive safely, the proposed introduction of spikes introduces new challenges, such as driver’s concern about own his safety and sudden movements like coughing and sneezing that are not in driver’s control, which the author has failed to address in his argument.
In conclusion, the author has made a claim for which he fails to provide enough evidence. He has made some far-fetched assumptions for which the line of reasoning is not very strong. The argument could be made more air tight if the author addresses the questions that have been posed to the argument in the earlier passages. The author has left too much to speculation, which makes his argument vulnerable and open to debate.
