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 1310:00 AM EST
-12:00 PM EST
Have you ever wondered how to score a PERFECT 805 on the GMAT? Meet Julia, a banking professional who used the Target Test Prep course to achieve this incredible feat. Julia's story is nothing short of an inspiration.
Dec 1410:00 AM EST
-12:00 PM EST
Think a 100% GMAT Verbal score is out of your reach? Target Test Prep will make you think again! Our course uses techniques such as topical study and spaced repetition to maximize knowledge retention and make studying simple and fun.
Dec 1411:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this session to learn how to Deconstruct arguments, Pre-Think Author’s Assumptions, and apply Negation Test.- Dec 15
11:00 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!
29 Oct 2021, 01:47
Kudos
Bookmarks
Analytical Writing Assessment Question
The following appeared in a memorandum issued by a large city's council on the arts.
“In a recent citywide poll, fifteen percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our city's art museums has increased by a similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports public television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, we can expect that attendance at our city's art museums will also start to decrease. Thus some of the city's funds for supporting the arts should be reallocated to public television.”
Discuss how logically persuasive you find the above argument. In presenting your point of view, analyze the sort of reasoning used and supporting evidence. In addition, state what further evidence, if any, would make the argument more sound and convincing or would make you better able to evaluate its conclusion.
MY RESPONSE :
The arguments tries to connect the viewership of visual arts program in television to the attendence of the people in museums. Further the argments states that if there is a severe cut in the visual programs then the number of people going to the museums will also decrease so in order to increase the number of people visiting the museums, the city's funds supporting the arts should be relocated to the public television. However, the line of reasoning in this argument is seriously flawed.
Firstly, The percentage in citywide poll doesn't reflect how many people participated in the poll and how many responded. For example if 10 people participated out of 100 people in the city and out of that only 2 people responded then the result of this survey can't be used. Also the argument considers that the people's preferance don't change with time which is wrong. Hence, a poll that was conducted 5 years ago is not a reliable source of data.
Secondly, There is no data to support that the television programs are stimulating people to go to museums. This is all based on a 5 year old poll data. There might be another factors that could be encouraging people to go to museums. For example, Increase in literacy among people might be a factor rather than television programs that have caused the increased visits in museums. Also, the prediction of severe paycuts is just a possibilty and not a certainity. Hence it can't be used to make solid decisions on something.
Thirdly, Even if we consider the poll data to be true and the link between visual arts program and increase visits to museums to be true.There is still no data to support that rellocation of funding to the public television will increase the number of visits since the rellocation of funding from arts to public television might affect the quality of arts produced which could further lead to a decrease in the number of visits to the museums.
The reasons stated above shows the major flaws in the line of reasoning of the argument. Hence to make the argument sound the aforementioned flaws needs to be removed and a proper line of reasoning must be established.
The following appeared in a memorandum issued by a large city's council on the arts.
“In a recent citywide poll, fifteen percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our city's art museums has increased by a similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports public television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, we can expect that attendance at our city's art museums will also start to decrease. Thus some of the city's funds for supporting the arts should be reallocated to public television.”
Discuss how logically persuasive you find the above argument. In presenting your point of view, analyze the sort of reasoning used and supporting evidence. In addition, state what further evidence, if any, would make the argument more sound and convincing or would make you better able to evaluate its conclusion.
MY RESPONSE :
The arguments tries to connect the viewership of visual arts program in television to the attendence of the people in museums. Further the argments states that if there is a severe cut in the visual programs then the number of people going to the museums will also decrease so in order to increase the number of people visiting the museums, the city's funds supporting the arts should be relocated to the public television. However, the line of reasoning in this argument is seriously flawed.
Firstly, The percentage in citywide poll doesn't reflect how many people participated in the poll and how many responded. For example if 10 people participated out of 100 people in the city and out of that only 2 people responded then the result of this survey can't be used. Also the argument considers that the people's preferance don't change with time which is wrong. Hence, a poll that was conducted 5 years ago is not a reliable source of data.
Secondly, There is no data to support that the television programs are stimulating people to go to museums. This is all based on a 5 year old poll data. There might be another factors that could be encouraging people to go to museums. For example, Increase in literacy among people might be a factor rather than television programs that have caused the increased visits in museums. Also, the prediction of severe paycuts is just a possibilty and not a certainity. Hence it can't be used to make solid decisions on something.
Thirdly, Even if we consider the poll data to be true and the link between visual arts program and increase visits to museums to be true.There is still no data to support that rellocation of funding to the public television will increase the number of visits since the rellocation of funding from arts to public television might affect the quality of arts produced which could further lead to a decrease in the number of visits to the museums.
The reasons stated above shows the major flaws in the line of reasoning of the argument. Hence to make the argument sound the aforementioned flaws needs to be removed and a proper line of reasoning must be established.
29 Oct 2021, 05:18
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hello iamlegend1493
Follow AWA forum rules before you post anything in the same forum, read the rules in the post in the link below
https://gmatclub.com/forum/awa-forum-ru ... 64141.html
Good Luck
Welcome to GMAT Club!
AWA Score: 5 out of 6
I have used a GMAT AWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay.
Coherence and connectivity: 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: 3/5
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: 4.5/5
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!
I have used a GMAT AWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay.
Coherence and connectivity: 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: 3/5
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: 4.5/5
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!
Follow AWA forum rules before you post anything in the same forum, read the rules in the post in the link below
https://gmatclub.com/forum/awa-forum-ru ... 64141.html
Good Luck
iamlegend1493
Analytical Writing Assessment Question
The following appeared in a memorandum issued by a large city's council on the arts.
“In a recent citywide poll, fifteen percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our city's art museums has increased by a similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports public television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, we can expect that attendance at our city's art museums will also start to decrease. Thus some of the city's funds for supporting the arts should be reallocated to public television.”
Discuss how logically persuasive you find the above argument. In presenting your point of view, analyze the sort of reasoning used and supporting evidence. In addition, state what further evidence, if any, would make the argument more sound and convincing or would make you better able to evaluate its conclusion.
MY RESPONSE :
The arguments tries to connect the viewership of visual arts program in television to the attendence of the people in museums. Further the argments states that if there is a severe cut in the visual programs then the number of people going to the museums will also decrease so in order to increase the number of people visiting the museums, the city's funds supporting the arts should be relocated to the public television. However, the line of reasoning in this argument is seriously flawed.
Firstly, The percentage in citywide poll doesn't reflect how many people participated in the poll and how many responded. For example if 10 people participated out of 100 people in the city and out of that only 2 people responded then the result of this survey can't be used. Also the argument considers that the people's preferance don't change with time which is wrong. Hence, a poll that was conducted 5 years ago is not a reliable source of data.
Secondly, There is no data to support that the television programs are stimulating people to go to museums. This is all based on a 5 year old poll data. There might be another factors that could be encouraging people to go to museums. For example, Increase in literacy among people might be a factor rather than television programs that have caused the increased visits in museums. Also, the prediction of severe paycuts is just a possibilty and not a certainity. Hence it can't be used to make solid decisions on something.
Thirdly, Even if we consider the poll data to be true and the link between visual arts program and increase visits to museums to be true.There is still no data to support that rellocation of funding to the public television will increase the number of visits since the rellocation of funding from arts to public television might affect the quality of arts produced which could further lead to a decrease in the number of visits to the museums.
The reasons stated above shows the major flaws in the line of reasoning of the argument. Hence to make the argument sound the aforementioned flaws needs to be removed and a proper line of reasoning must be established.
The following appeared in a memorandum issued by a large city's council on the arts.
“In a recent citywide poll, fifteen percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our city's art museums has increased by a similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports public television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, we can expect that attendance at our city's art museums will also start to decrease. Thus some of the city's funds for supporting the arts should be reallocated to public television.”
Discuss how logically persuasive you find the above argument. In presenting your point of view, analyze the sort of reasoning used and supporting evidence. In addition, state what further evidence, if any, would make the argument more sound and convincing or would make you better able to evaluate its conclusion.
MY RESPONSE :
The arguments tries to connect the viewership of visual arts program in television to the attendence of the people in museums. Further the argments states that if there is a severe cut in the visual programs then the number of people going to the museums will also decrease so in order to increase the number of people visiting the museums, the city's funds supporting the arts should be relocated to the public television. However, the line of reasoning in this argument is seriously flawed.
Firstly, The percentage in citywide poll doesn't reflect how many people participated in the poll and how many responded. For example if 10 people participated out of 100 people in the city and out of that only 2 people responded then the result of this survey can't be used. Also the argument considers that the people's preferance don't change with time which is wrong. Hence, a poll that was conducted 5 years ago is not a reliable source of data.
Secondly, There is no data to support that the television programs are stimulating people to go to museums. This is all based on a 5 year old poll data. There might be another factors that could be encouraging people to go to museums. For example, Increase in literacy among people might be a factor rather than television programs that have caused the increased visits in museums. Also, the prediction of severe paycuts is just a possibilty and not a certainity. Hence it can't be used to make solid decisions on something.
Thirdly, Even if we consider the poll data to be true and the link between visual arts program and increase visits to museums to be true.There is still no data to support that rellocation of funding to the public television will increase the number of visits since the rellocation of funding from arts to public television might affect the quality of arts produced which could further lead to a decrease in the number of visits to the museums.
The reasons stated above shows the major flaws in the line of reasoning of the argument. Hence to make the argument sound the aforementioned flaws needs to be removed and a proper line of reasoning must be established.
10 May 2022, 00:25
Kudos
Bookmarks
Please grade my response as well.
“In a recent citywide poll, 15 percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts
than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our
city’s art museums has increased by a similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports public television,
where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, we can expect that
attendance at our city’s art museums will also start to decrease. Thus some of the city’s funds for supporting the arts
should be reallocated to public television.”
---------------
MY RESPONSE
---------------
The argument suggests that because, in past 5 years, increase in percentage of residents watching visual arts on television and people visiting art museum is same, there is a strong relationship between people watching arts on TV and people appreciating arts in museum. However, the argument seriously fails to present any evidence to prove what it claims and hastily lands on a conclusion. A few of such instances are as follows.
Firstly, author assumes that all the people who watch visual arts programs on TV are the only people motivated to visit art museums. In fact, it can be quite the opposite. It is possible that people who enjoy arts on TV are not able to or do not want to travel to visit museum in person. There can be many reasons for increase in visitors to museum like more students taking arts as a major subject or education policy changes in schools and colleges that require students' visits to arts museum. But, there is no reason provided to support the inference. Another reason for increase in city museum's attendance can be tourism. Authorities may have spend some funds to advertise the museum outside the city or have purchased some new displays for museum that attracted for visitors.
Additionally, the argument that decrease in funding of public television will affect the attendance in art museum is completely superficial and is not supported by any facts or statistics. Contrary to author's assumption, authorities can attract more visitors to the museum by diverting arts funding of public television towards adding more displays at city museum, providing more facilities or better maintaining the city museum. Again, no information is given to relate the trends of residents watching arts on TV and people visiting art museum.
Hence, the conclusion of reallocating arts funds to public television lacks proper reasoning and statistical support. Author should take help of some statistics to reflect that people are getting inspired to visit city museum by watching visual arts on television. This would make the conclusion strong and convincing.
“In a recent citywide poll, 15 percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts
than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our
city’s art museums has increased by a similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports public television,
where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, we can expect that
attendance at our city’s art museums will also start to decrease. Thus some of the city’s funds for supporting the arts
should be reallocated to public television.”
---------------
MY RESPONSE
---------------
The argument suggests that because, in past 5 years, increase in percentage of residents watching visual arts on television and people visiting art museum is same, there is a strong relationship between people watching arts on TV and people appreciating arts in museum. However, the argument seriously fails to present any evidence to prove what it claims and hastily lands on a conclusion. A few of such instances are as follows.
Firstly, author assumes that all the people who watch visual arts programs on TV are the only people motivated to visit art museums. In fact, it can be quite the opposite. It is possible that people who enjoy arts on TV are not able to or do not want to travel to visit museum in person. There can be many reasons for increase in visitors to museum like more students taking arts as a major subject or education policy changes in schools and colleges that require students' visits to arts museum. But, there is no reason provided to support the inference. Another reason for increase in city museum's attendance can be tourism. Authorities may have spend some funds to advertise the museum outside the city or have purchased some new displays for museum that attracted for visitors.
Additionally, the argument that decrease in funding of public television will affect the attendance in art museum is completely superficial and is not supported by any facts or statistics. Contrary to author's assumption, authorities can attract more visitors to the museum by diverting arts funding of public television towards adding more displays at city museum, providing more facilities or better maintaining the city museum. Again, no information is given to relate the trends of residents watching arts on TV and people visiting art museum.
Hence, the conclusion of reallocating arts funds to public television lacks proper reasoning and statistical support. Author should take help of some statistics to reflect that people are getting inspired to visit city museum by watching visual arts on television. This would make the conclusion strong and convincing.
