Two years ago Nova High School began to use interactive computer instr
[#permalink]
15 Apr 2020, 19:26
This is second attempt at writing a GMAT Essay. I am appearing in July for my GMAT exam. Aiming for 6. See the topic of the essay and my response to follow. I wrote this in 30 mins and was honest in making sure i kept the process as test like as possible.
The following appeared as part of a newspapr editorial:
“Two years ago Nova High School began to use interactive computer instruction in three academic subjects. The school dropout rate declined immediately, and last year’s graduates have reported some impressive achievements in college. In future budgets the school board should use a greater portion of the available funds to buy more computers, and all schools in the district should adopt interactive computer instruction throughout the curriculum.”
The argument presented is weak and unconvincing because of a number of reasons. There are many unjustified assumptions made by the author. For example, the decline in drop out rate being potrayed as a consequence of using interactive computer instruction is not bolstered by any real evidence which specifically links the two. There is also a generalization presented that what is good for Nova High school must also be good for all other high schools in the district.
The primary flaw in the argument is the assumption that the high school drop out rate plummeted because of computer instruction. There is no real evidence which indicates that. There could be an alternative explanation to the reduction in dropout rate which could be equally probable. For example, the school might have reduced tuition fee and hired some exceptional and well renowned teachers which could have attracted students to stay.
Had there been more information provided which would connect the dropout rate to the aspect of computer instruction, the argument could have been more convincing. For instance if it was presented that dropouts have decreased in classes where computer instruction is the medium of learning, it would have strengthened the argument presented. Even then there could have been a multitude of factors which could still call into question the author’s conclusion.
Another broken link in the argument comes from the author’s assertion that students have reported some impressive achievements in college, with no indication to the specifics of the achievements. This is very general and could be interpreted in many ways. For example, these achievements could have been in areas where computer instruction had no role to play. For all we know, the students performed extraordinarily in sports in college whereas the high school did not have computer instruction in sports.
If we assume that computer instruction did indeed have all the positive effects noted in the argument, the assumption that other high schools in the district would also benefit from this method of education is very ambitious. Each high school has a different student base with varying requirements. There may be high schools in the district where students cannot cope with the non-interactive nature of computer instruction and demand a human element.
Because the argument makes several unwarranted assumptions, it fails to make a convincing case that all district schools should adopt computer instruction.