Free: Official GMAT AWA Evaluation 1 of 4

I am trying to evaluate how well GMAC's AWA Practic tool works.
If you want, you can post your essay here on the following topic and I will evaluate it using the Official Tool.
Just post your essay here as a reply and the first 2 replies will get evaluated


Read the statement and the instructions that follow it, and then make any notes that will help you plan your response. Type your response in the box at the bottom of the screen.



_________________

My response:

The argument states that "Last year, the city contracted with Flower Power to plant a variety of flowers in big decorative pots on Main Street and to water them each week, but by midsummer many of the plants had wilted. This year the city could either contract Flower power for two waterings a week or save money by planting artificial flowers in the pots. According to Flower Power, the initial cost for artificial flowers would be twice as much as that of real plants, but after two years, the city would save money. Public reaction certainly supports this position and according to a survey over 1200 Gazette readers said that the city wastes money and should find ways to reduce spending." Presented in this way, the argument misses the mark by a mile and by failing to mention a lot of key points and reasons, it makes it really hard for the reader to understand as to why things happen the way they happened and could something else have been done to change the final conclusion ?

First, the argument starts by letting us know that last year, the city contracted with a firm called Flower Power to plant a variety of flowers in big decorative pots on Main Street and to water them each week. Unfortunately, by midsummer a lot of the plants had wilted. The surprising details that the author of the argument has omitted are which flowers were chosen? Did the flowers suit the climate of the city? Could the flowers have survived on just being watering once a week? Did the flowers need to be tended more often? Did the flowers drain the soil of its nutrients leading to the soil needing fertilizers to sustain the growth of the flowers over a longer period of time? etc. Generally, in arguments like the one the author has presented us here with, explanations ae provided for the kind of details that have been omitted here. This led to the argument not being coherent and a little lopsided and we are not given any information as to whether Flower Power took any remedial measures or they just blindly continued watering the flowers once a week as per the contract.

Secondly, the author states that now the city has to decide whether they should increase the watering of the flowers to twice a week or turn towards planting artificial flowers in pots. To this Flower Power has replied that the initial costs of planting artificial flowers is twice that of planting real flowers but after two years, the city would be saving money. The question that comes rushing right at me after reading this is why didn't the city authority explore all scenarios before going ahead with its plan of planting flowers in pots on main street in the first place. This scenario is akin to when the National Highway authority decide to build an expressway connecting two cities but decide to construct the expressway using material that cannot endure the wear and tear of the number of vehicles that use the expressway or can endure the wear and tear but the climatic conditions make the material unsuitable for use but still the authorities go ahead with it. At this point of time, going ahead with planting artificial flowers is being penny wise but pound foolish. All these missing details make the argument suspect.

Finally, the argument concludes by saying that public reaction supports this position and a survey by the Gazette says that 1200 readers said that the city wastes money and should find ways to reduce wasteful expenditure. From the conclusion we can understand what the reaction of the citizens is but we cannot be certain of what the city authority plans on doing, which proposal are they going to go ahead with is not mentioned and there is no clarity as to whether they will pay heed to the results of the survey and do what the people want or just go ahead with what they think is best without bothering what the citizens have to say.

In summary, this argument is unconvincing and flawed due to many of the reasons mentioned above. The argument could have been made considerably airtight by including the relevant and essential information. In the absence of which, this argument leaves much to be desired and open to debate.

Thank you for posting. Here is the official AWA report/score. The total score is 6, even though there are some improvements that could be made. So it is definitely between 5.5 and 6 (the score would be determined more so by the human reader since I can see it going either way but it would not be less than 5.5)


_________________

This is my first attempt at AWA- please bear with me


The probable line of reasoning used in the argument is that having artificial flowers would save money in the long run. The evidence stems from the statment about public reaction supporting the statement by -highlighting that the city spends wastefully. Firstly, I do not find the argument well-reasoned since we are not given enough information about how the "city wastes money" by planting flowers. We would be able to evaluate the argument better if we could understand what the public perceived as wasting money. The argument could be enhanced by stating certain specific areas of improvement such as increase the spending on sanitation etc. This would help us gauge the public reaction better. The arguement further assumes that flowers serve only a decorative purpose. However, it would be incorrect to assume so. By suggesting the use of artificial flowers, the city is doing away with some of the effects of real plants such as better air quality. The public argument overlooks the fact the city might be able to reap beneifts of a natural ecosystem, like cross-pollination by mainatining real flowers.The argument would make a stronger case if it highlighted the mismanagement of the plants by the city. This indeed, was wasteful, as the resources were not managed well.

Thanks for taking a shot at it. You have a bit of a way to go.

Using the unofficial AWA grader GMATAWA, here is what I have:




Please do not forget to use the Chineseburnt AWA Template!
https://gmatclub.com/forum/how-to-get-6 ... 64327.html
_________________

Hello kntombat, really great essay. Just one question. Is it advisable to quote the entire argument word to word in the first paragraph or to paraphrase it in my own words?
bb your help will also be highly appreciated. Thanks!

Posted from my mobile device

gmatbalar, in my case it actually depends on the questions.
If you feel that you can do a better job paraphrasing the prompt then go for it. Personally I prefer to paraphrase it.

The argument claims that the city should contract with Flower Power for two waterings a week or save money by planting artificial flowers in the pots. To support this conclusion, the argument claims that by midsummer of last year, many of the plants wilted, and that while the initial cost for artificial flowers would be twice as much as for real plants, two years later, the city would save money. Also, 1200 Gazette readers said that the city wastes money and should find ways to reduce spending. Stated in this way, the argument manipulates facts and conveys a distorted view of the situation. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.

First, the argument readily assumes that contracting for two waterings a week would save prevent the plants from wilting. This statement is a stretch and not substantiated in any way. For instance, plants lose a lot of water to evaporation in summer, and require plenty of water to replenish the lost water. If the twice-a-week watering of the plants is insufficient to keep them from wilting, the potential contract would not be any better than last year's. Further, the author could have considered drip irrigation to keep the plants hydrated throughout the week, while not wasting water resources. The argument could be clearer if it had explicitly stated that twice-a-week watering of the plants would be sufficient to keep the plants on the Main Street from wilting in the summer.

Second, the argument claims that public reaction supports replacing real flowers with artificial flowers because over 1200 Gazette readers said that the city wastes money and should find ways to reduce spending. This is again a very weak and unsupported claim as the argument does not demonstrate any correlation between finding others ways to reduce spending and replacing real flowers with artificial flowers. To illustrate, it is not clear whether the Gazette readers gave any specific examples of better ways of spending the money. While, artificial flowers may not need frequent watering like the real flowers, Flower Power estimates that the city would see money savings only after two years from investing in artificial flowers. From the argument, it is unclear what the typical life of an artificial flower is. If these flowers need to be replaced every two years due to potential damage or discoloration, investing in artificial flowers might not be a wise decision to save money. If the argument had provided evidence that investing in artificial flowers would would lead to long term savings as well as would not need regular reinvestment, compared to real flowers, then the argument would have been a lot more convincing.

Finally, has the author considered switching to flowers that use less water to save costs in summer and prevent them from wilting? Also, has the author considered other ideas apart from flowers to decorate the Main Street to reduce spending as suggested by the readers of the Gazette such as using low powered LED lights? Without convincing answers to these questions, one is left with an impression that the claim is more wishful thinking than substantive evidence.

In conclusion, the argument is weak and unconvincing. It could be considerably strengthened if the author had mentioned all the relevant facts, such as water requirement of flowers in summer, shelf-life of artificial flowers, alternative flowers or decoration options. In order to assess the merits of the claim that the city should contract for two waterings a week or plant artificial flowers, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors. Without this information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.


PS: I am not sure if this could still be 'officially' evaluated. Nevertheless, I request and appreciate feedback on my essay. Thank you.

Good Luck

The argument in the corporate memorandum claims that the promotional sale price on company's energy drinks have been highly successful. In doing so, the corporation establishes a correlation between the sales number and the degree of success. Moreover, the corporation states results from a survey. Hence, the corporation conclude that to further increase profitability as well as consumers perceptions, similar sale price be introduced to all drinks produced by the beverage manufacturer. The argument as stated includes several unstated assumptions and many factors on which the argument depends. Without explicitly stating those assumptions along with concrete examples, the argument remain weak and includes several major flaws.

Firstly, the argument establishes a correlation between the sales number and the degree of the success of its promotional price campaign. There are several possibility that can exists such as - this correlation can be just a chance of events or some third factor can contribute to cause such correlation. It raises many questions that need to be answered to cancel these doubts. For example - How was the economical condition among the consumers during the period of the sale? This is a critical piece of information. If the economy was in robust growth with several stimulus to provide positive momentum to consumer practices then it could be that the economic strength resulted the correlation instead of the promotional price. The argument can be strengthened by answering such questions.

Secondly, the argument draws conclusion based on the result of a single survey without laying out the details of such survey. Surveys can be biased and can be non-representational of the population. The survey also takes for granted that the majority of the respondent are indeed the majority of the revenue generator. What if the survey does not include the top five purchaser of the product? This will invalidate the conclusion drawn from the survey. The argument can be improved by providing more details on the survey method used and by including the details of the survey participants and their relationship to the total consumers of the energy drinks.

Thirdly, the argument draws a general conclusion on the basis of the result of a single part. Thus, the argument results in a part to total flaw in its argument formation. The result of a part cannot necessarily be the determinant for the overall structure. For example, the consumers of the other energy drinks could be of different age group or could consists of different social brackets, which inherently influences those consumers relationship to those other products. However, the argument can be strengthened if it can provide more information on the other drinks produced by the firm, including but not limited to the consumers of those energy drinks, total sales, distribution network, supply chain mechanisms of such products etc. Without these information, such part to total generalization holds no ground to stand on.

Furthermore, the argument considers only one option to improve its profitability and increase the perception in the eyes of its consumers. There could be many other options and some of those options could be more effective for the company than the option proposed. For instance, the company can form strategic partnerships with influencers. This is a common practice among consumer brands. For example, soccer star Messi, Ronaldo, Neymar all have partnerships with energy drinks for which they promote the products to their followers, which in turn improves both the profitability and perception of those product to those products consumers. The argument can be strengthened by laying out all other options and evaluating each against each other and only then proposing the most effective solution, without such industry benchmarking, the argument remains debatable and open to criticism.

In summary, the argument includes several flaws and assumptions and it does not provide any concrete examples or case specific evidence to support its claims. In order to evaluate the strength of a claim, it is necessary to consider all the possibility and cases that exist in the realm of the argument. As pointed out, this argument does not provide such evidences or examples and thus, it remains open to debate and has no legs to stand on.

Good Luck

Thanks Sajjad1994

Sajjad1994 Please grade! Thanks!

The argument by The Homebuilder magazine states that as per the survey conducted by the magazine, 70% of the respondents stated that they are willing to build or purchase a new house during the next two years. Based on this survey result the Homebuilder Magazine predicts that the growth within the construction industry will probably increase in the near future. Hence, the argument concludes that the construction industry offers incredible investment opportunities. The argument as stated includes several flaws and unstated assumptions, on the basis of which the argument is dependent on. Without knowing these assumptions or having evidence of such claim, the argument remains open to debate, weak and has no support to stand by itself.

Firstly, the argument establishes a correlation between the survey results and the growth of the industry. This correlation could be an imagination of the author of the argument. The growth of the industry is not dependent solely on the respondent of a particular survey. The argument needs to clarify assumptions behind establishing such correlation and answer the following questions. What is the portion of the house construction against the total construction. What portion of the GDP is contributed by the house construction and the total construction industry. These answers will help to establish the market share of the house construction in comparison to the construction industry as a whole. To strengthen this argument these answers need to be answered.

Secondly, the argument takes the survey results at its face value. The survey results could be biased based on the survey population it was sent to. What if the survey results were sent only to young families who currently do not own any properties and wish to purchase some in the near future, that will skew the percentage of respondents who are willing to purchase in the near future. The argument needs to provide details on the process of the survey, including the information of the survey sample size as these information can influence the results inferred from the survey. Without these assumptions stated the argument remains invalid.

Thirdly, the argument disregards the other factors of an economy that can affect the conclusion stated. The argument states that the construction industry offers a lucrative investment opportunities but what if there is a downturn in the economy, war or pandemic during the next two years or in the near future. For examples, many young families were planning to purchase homes prior to the COVID-19 pandemic but as the pandemic came into play, that number dropped significantly as the uncertainty concerning the economic well-being became more and more uncertain and thus, any investments made in the house construction suffered. What guaranteed that such circumstances will not repeat in the time horizon the argument speaks of? The argument needs to consider such risks factors and quantify those along with the survey results to draw a conclusion which is more realistic. This will in turn strengthen the argument.

Lastly, the argument makes an error known as "Part-to-whole". The argument uses the part (the house construction) to make conclusion about the whole (the construction industry). This is a common mistake among weak arguments. We cannot make conclusion of a total sample population based on the parts. what if the parts of the samples are the outliers? In that case the argument and the conclusion drawn will fall apart. To correct this, the argument needs to look at the whole and each and every components of the total population and establish relationships among those parts, only then a proper conclusion can be drawn.

In conclusion, as stated throughout the essay, the argument includes not just one but several major flaws and unstated assumptions. These flaws and unstated assumptions make the argument weak and open to debate. However, the argument can be strengthened if concrete examples, full disclosure of all assumptions and evidences are laid out "as is". Otherwise, the argument remains vulnerable to criticism.

Good Luck

Please grade this. Thanks!

The author states that the best way to face the issue of city expenses and maintenance of flowers planted by Flower Power, is to replace them with artificial plants. This statement is based on a survey that is not only vague but also limited to a small population of Gazette readers.

Although there is merit in making decisions using surveys based on public opinion, the survey itself is vague at best. Despite the fact that the public states that they wish the city be careful about expenses, the survey doesn’t truly gauge what would be the reaction of the public regarding the actual replacement of real plants with artificial ones. It isn’t clear what kind of expenses they wish should be cut down, and this hinders the author’s conclusion regarding the installation of artificial plants.

Another problem with the survey is that it only takes into account the opinions of the readers of the Gazette. It is possible that readers of the Gazette have a different opinion, as opposed to the majority of the city. It would make the author’s claims much more credible, if they took the opinions of a broader sample population, as opposed to limiting themselves to just their own magazine’s readers.

Given that the survey, based on which the author made their conclusion, only represents the opinion of a niche population of the city, it would be a gross mistake to make city development plans based on it. In addition to this, the survey is unclear as to what kind of expenses do the people want to see cut, and whether the bringing in of artificial flowers in a positive light. Hence, a more clear survey should be done, regarding the flowers’ maintenance and replacement, among a broader section of the city population.

Good Luck