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!
sheungcheng
Joined: 10 Feb 2022
Last visit: 10 Mar 2024
Posts: 7
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 1
Location: Hong Kong
Schools: INSEAD Aug'23 intake (A)
GPA: 3.44
27 Mar 2022, 00:05
Kudos
Bookmarks
“Under Police Commissioner Draco, the city of Spartanburg began jailing people for committing petty crimes such as littering, shoplifting, and spraying graffiti. Criminals in Spartanburg must have understood that lawlessness would no longer be tolerated, because the following year Spartanburg saw a 20% drop in violent crimes such as homicide. Our town should learn from Commissioner Draco’s success, and begin a large-scale crackdown on petty crime.”
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.
In this article, the author asserts that Barchester should follow the practice of Spartanburg, jailing petty crimes such as littering, shoplifting and spraying graffiti. It believes it will help reduce violent crimes, given the experience in Spartanburg. This argument is unsound and unconvincing as the author lacks of sufficient evidences and solid assumptions to support his claims.
First, the assumption that Barchester and Spartanburg will yield the same result in reducing violent crimes is unwarranted. The two cities have different population and diversity of people; hence, simply assuming the action will yield the same result doesn't convince readers.
Second, the author doesn't provide the reason why jailing petty crimes contributes to drop in violent crimes. These two types of crimes are very different and they are properly committed by different type of people. Teenagers are more likely to commit petty crimes, while adults with criminal records are more likely to crime serious crime like homicide. The author fails to show the connection how these two types of crimes connect with one another.
Third, the author neglects to take other factors into account that could contribute to the drop in violent crimes. There could be other reasons that have more direct relationship to the outcome, such as increased budget for police spending, improved education system, etc. The author has to show more evidences to explain why jailing petty crimes are the key drivers over other options in order to be more persuasive.
For the reasons mentioned above, the argument from the author is not persuasive. The argument will be stronger if one provides more supports to back up how jailing crimes causes drop in violent crimes and explain what's the rationale behind the projection that Barchester and Spartanburg will result in the same outcome.
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.
In this article, the author asserts that Barchester should follow the practice of Spartanburg, jailing petty crimes such as littering, shoplifting and spraying graffiti. It believes it will help reduce violent crimes, given the experience in Spartanburg. This argument is unsound and unconvincing as the author lacks of sufficient evidences and solid assumptions to support his claims.
First, the assumption that Barchester and Spartanburg will yield the same result in reducing violent crimes is unwarranted. The two cities have different population and diversity of people; hence, simply assuming the action will yield the same result doesn't convince readers.
Second, the author doesn't provide the reason why jailing petty crimes contributes to drop in violent crimes. These two types of crimes are very different and they are properly committed by different type of people. Teenagers are more likely to commit petty crimes, while adults with criminal records are more likely to crime serious crime like homicide. The author fails to show the connection how these two types of crimes connect with one another.
Third, the author neglects to take other factors into account that could contribute to the drop in violent crimes. There could be other reasons that have more direct relationship to the outcome, such as increased budget for police spending, improved education system, etc. The author has to show more evidences to explain why jailing petty crimes are the key drivers over other options in order to be more persuasive.
For the reasons mentioned above, the argument from the author is not persuasive. The argument will be stronger if one provides more supports to back up how jailing crimes causes drop in violent crimes and explain what's the rationale behind the projection that Barchester and Spartanburg will result in the same outcome.
27 Mar 2022, 01:03
Kudos
Bookmarks
AWA Score: 5.5 - 6 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: 4/5
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: 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: 4/5
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: 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!
Good Luck
sheungcheng
“Under Police Commissioner Draco, the city of Spartanburg began jailing people for committing petty crimes such as littering, shoplifting, and spraying graffiti. Criminals in Spartanburg must have understood that lawlessness would no longer be tolerated, because the following year Spartanburg saw a 20% drop in violent crimes such as homicide. Our town should learn from Commissioner Draco’s success, and begin a large-scale crackdown on petty crime.”
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.
In this article, the author asserts that Barchester should follow the practice of Spartanburg, jailing petty crimes such as littering, shoplifting and spraying graffiti. It believes it will help reduce violent crimes, given the experience in Spartanburg. This argument is unsound and unconvincing as the author lacks of sufficient evidences and solid assumptions to support his claims.
First, the assumption that Barchester and Spartanburg will yield the same result in reducing violent crimes is unwarranted. The two cities have different population and diversity of people; hence, simply assuming the action will yield the same result doesn't convince readers.
Second, the author doesn't provide the reason why jailing petty crimes contributes to drop in violent crimes. These two types of crimes are very different and they are properly committed by different type of people. Teenagers are more likely to commit petty crimes, while adults with criminal records are more likely to crime serious crime like homicide. The author fails to show the connection how these two types of crimes connect with one another.
Third, the author neglects to take other factors into account that could contribute to the drop in violent crimes. There could be other reasons that have more direct relationship to the outcome, such as increased budget for police spending, improved education system, etc. The author has to show more evidences to explain why jailing petty crimes are the key drivers over other options in order to be more persuasive.
For the reasons mentioned above, the argument from the author is not persuasive. The argument will be stronger if one provides more supports to back up how jailing crimes causes drop in violent crimes and explain what's the rationale behind the projection that Barchester and Spartanburg will result in the same outcome.
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.
In this article, the author asserts that Barchester should follow the practice of Spartanburg, jailing petty crimes such as littering, shoplifting and spraying graffiti. It believes it will help reduce violent crimes, given the experience in Spartanburg. This argument is unsound and unconvincing as the author lacks of sufficient evidences and solid assumptions to support his claims.
First, the assumption that Barchester and Spartanburg will yield the same result in reducing violent crimes is unwarranted. The two cities have different population and diversity of people; hence, simply assuming the action will yield the same result doesn't convince readers.
Second, the author doesn't provide the reason why jailing petty crimes contributes to drop in violent crimes. These two types of crimes are very different and they are properly committed by different type of people. Teenagers are more likely to commit petty crimes, while adults with criminal records are more likely to crime serious crime like homicide. The author fails to show the connection how these two types of crimes connect with one another.
Third, the author neglects to take other factors into account that could contribute to the drop in violent crimes. There could be other reasons that have more direct relationship to the outcome, such as increased budget for police spending, improved education system, etc. The author has to show more evidences to explain why jailing petty crimes are the key drivers over other options in order to be more persuasive.
For the reasons mentioned above, the argument from the author is not persuasive. The argument will be stronger if one provides more supports to back up how jailing crimes causes drop in violent crimes and explain what's the rationale behind the projection that Barchester and Spartanburg will result in the same outcome.
Moderators:
