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.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
17 Oct 2023, 07:13
Kudos
Bookmarks
Thanks in advance for evaluating my essay! I have a few questions as well -
- My essay is only 377 words - do you think I should try to hit a higher word count like 500 (or even set a minimum like 400)? I know we can't see the word count in the actual GMAT, but just trying to get a sense of what I should be aiming for during my prep.
- For the GMAT, is it ok to start sentences with "it" (in reference to things like the author, the argument, and the conclusion), or does the computer grader not consider "it" a proper/descriptive enough subject?
---------------------
The following appeared in a magazine article on trends and lifestyles.
"In general, people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. Walk into the Heart's Delight, a store that started selling organic fruits and vegetables and whole-grain flours in the 1960's, and you will also find a wide selection of cheeses made with high butterfat content. Next door, the owners of the Good Earth Café, an old vegetarian restaurant, are still making a modest living, but the owners of the new House of Beef across the street are millionaires."
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.
My answer:
The argument claims that people are less concerned now than a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. Stated in this way, it fails to mention several key factors regarding this trend and relies on assumptions which if proven false, would undermine the examples that are provided as evidence of the trend. Because of these flaws, the argument is weak and unconvincing.
First, the argument readily assumes that Heart’s Delight’s decision to start selling fatty cheeses was driven by the consumers’ decreased concern for regulating their fatty cheese intake. This cannot be assumed; Heart’s Delight could be motivated by a number of alternative non-consumer driven factors, such as competitor grocery stores’ product selection or incentives from product suppliers, for selling the fatty cheeses. The argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly stated the reason why Heart’s Delight started selling fatty cheeses. The example comparing the two restaurants contains the same faulty logic. There could be a plethora of reasons that have nothing to do with the difference in their menu offerings, such as price and food quality, for why the beef restaurant is performing better than the vegetarian restaurant.
Secondly, the argument’s conclusion is entirely based on observations of two restaurant and one grocery store. Whether these establishments are representative of this large, likely national, consumer trend is highly questionable. The conclusion is a hasty generationalization based on few pieces of evidence. In addition, one is left without an adequate understanding of consumers’ true feelings about their regulation of red meat and fatty food intake. If the results of a relevant survey of a large sample of consumers who are diverse across multiple dimensions, such as age, weight, and region of residence, then the answer to the question of whether and why consumers are decreasing their regulation of red meat and fatty food consumption would be much more well-founded and convincing.
In summary, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and fails to inspire faith in its conclusion about decreased regulation. It could be considerably strengthened if the author mentioned evidence about specifically consumers’ behavior and sentiment. Without these improvements, the argument remains nothing but a hasty generalization reliant on weak and minimal evidence.
- My essay is only 377 words - do you think I should try to hit a higher word count like 500 (or even set a minimum like 400)? I know we can't see the word count in the actual GMAT, but just trying to get a sense of what I should be aiming for during my prep.
- For the GMAT, is it ok to start sentences with "it" (in reference to things like the author, the argument, and the conclusion), or does the computer grader not consider "it" a proper/descriptive enough subject?
---------------------
The following appeared in a magazine article on trends and lifestyles.
"In general, people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. Walk into the Heart's Delight, a store that started selling organic fruits and vegetables and whole-grain flours in the 1960's, and you will also find a wide selection of cheeses made with high butterfat content. Next door, the owners of the Good Earth Café, an old vegetarian restaurant, are still making a modest living, but the owners of the new House of Beef across the street are millionaires."
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.
My answer:
The argument claims that people are less concerned now than a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. Stated in this way, it fails to mention several key factors regarding this trend and relies on assumptions which if proven false, would undermine the examples that are provided as evidence of the trend. Because of these flaws, the argument is weak and unconvincing.
First, the argument readily assumes that Heart’s Delight’s decision to start selling fatty cheeses was driven by the consumers’ decreased concern for regulating their fatty cheese intake. This cannot be assumed; Heart’s Delight could be motivated by a number of alternative non-consumer driven factors, such as competitor grocery stores’ product selection or incentives from product suppliers, for selling the fatty cheeses. The argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly stated the reason why Heart’s Delight started selling fatty cheeses. The example comparing the two restaurants contains the same faulty logic. There could be a plethora of reasons that have nothing to do with the difference in their menu offerings, such as price and food quality, for why the beef restaurant is performing better than the vegetarian restaurant.
Secondly, the argument’s conclusion is entirely based on observations of two restaurant and one grocery store. Whether these establishments are representative of this large, likely national, consumer trend is highly questionable. The conclusion is a hasty generationalization based on few pieces of evidence. In addition, one is left without an adequate understanding of consumers’ true feelings about their regulation of red meat and fatty food intake. If the results of a relevant survey of a large sample of consumers who are diverse across multiple dimensions, such as age, weight, and region of residence, then the answer to the question of whether and why consumers are decreasing their regulation of red meat and fatty food consumption would be much more well-founded and convincing.
In summary, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and fails to inspire faith in its conclusion about decreased regulation. It could be considerably strengthened if the author mentioned evidence about specifically consumers’ behavior and sentiment. Without these improvements, the argument remains nothing but a hasty generalization reliant on weak and minimal evidence.
17 Oct 2023, 11:55
Kudos
Bookmarks
AWA Score: 5.5 out of 6
Coherence and Connectivity: 5.5
The essay is generally well-structured and coherent, with clear paragraph transitions. The argument is effectively developed and presented in a logical sequence.
Word Structure: 6
The essay uses a wide range of vocabulary appropriately. Sentence structure is varied and effective.
Paragraph Structure and Formation: 5
Paragraphs are appropriately structured, with clear topic sentences and supporting details. However, the first paragraph could be more concise.
Language and Grammar: 5.5
The essay demonstrates a strong command of language and grammar. There are a few minor grammatical issues, but they do not significantly hinder comprehension.
Vocabulary and Word Expression: 6
The essay employs a rich and varied vocabulary. The choice of words and expressions is appropriate for the context.
Overall, this essay provides a well-structured and coherent response to the argument prompt. It effectively analyzes the argument's reasoning and highlights its flaws. There are minor areas for improvement in paragraph structure and grammar, but overall, it is a strong response.
Coherence and Connectivity: 5.5
The essay is generally well-structured and coherent, with clear paragraph transitions. The argument is effectively developed and presented in a logical sequence.
Word Structure: 6
The essay uses a wide range of vocabulary appropriately. Sentence structure is varied and effective.
Paragraph Structure and Formation: 5
Paragraphs are appropriately structured, with clear topic sentences and supporting details. However, the first paragraph could be more concise.
Language and Grammar: 5.5
The essay demonstrates a strong command of language and grammar. There are a few minor grammatical issues, but they do not significantly hinder comprehension.
Vocabulary and Word Expression: 6
The essay employs a rich and varied vocabulary. The choice of words and expressions is appropriate for the context.
Overall, this essay provides a well-structured and coherent response to the argument prompt. It effectively analyzes the argument's reasoning and highlights its flaws. There are minor areas for improvement in paragraph structure and grammar, but overall, it is a strong response.
ｃｈｌｏｅｅｓｔｒａｄａ
Moderator:
