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!- Dec 17
09:00 AM PST
-10:00 AM PST
Join Manhattan Prep instructor Whitney Garner for a fun—and thorough—review of logic-based (non-math) problems, with a particular emphasis on Data Sufficiency and Two-Parts. - Dec 18
10:00 AM PST
-11:00 AM PST
Here is the essential guide to securing scholarships as an MBA student! In this video, we explore the various types of scholarships available, including need-based and merit-based options.
15 Aug 2019, 17:25
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hey All! I'm preparing to take the GMAT in a few months and am following the Magoosh study plan. I just wrote my first AWA and would be grateful if someone with a bit more experience with the exam could help me out by taking a look and grading. Prompt is below in italics and the response below that in bold. Thanks so much!
The following appeared as part of a newspaper 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 grater 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 in the editorial posits that the introduction of computerized instruction at NOVA high school led to a decline in the school’s dropout rate, consequently arguing that such instruction ought to be adopted across all schools in the district. This line of reasoning, is seriously flawed for several reasons, mainly because it attributes certain effects to factors that we cannot definitively say caused them.
The most glaring error in the logic the editorial uses is the idea that the use of computerized instruction definitively led to a reduction in the dropout rate in NOVA high school. The computerized instruction, so lauded by the editorial, was only provided in three subjects at NOVA high school meaning that the reduced dropout rate could stem from improved instruction in other classes where it was not used. Moreover, even in the classes that such instruction was used, definitively concluding that computerized instruction was the cause of increased student success with the information given is a tenous argument. For example, studies have shown that if teachers adopt a practice known as “teaching a growth mindset”, wherein all they do is simply encourage the students by telling them they are capable of growing academically and reinforcing that idea constantly, students improve their grades. In such a scenario, computerized instruction may have been present but the sole catalyst in student improvement and a lower dropout rate was purely psychological and unrelated to such instruction. Additional information such as a survey conducted among students who received computerized instruction and those that didn’t would allow us to gain a better understanding of whether or not such instruction positively affected their academic performance. Even with such information, however, it is difficult to make a sweeping conclusion on such instruction’s effect on the dropout rate since a whole plethora of social, environmental, and internal factors can affect an individual student’s grades.
The logical leaps the editorial makes bounds even further when considering its overall conclusion. Saying that every school in the district should adopt NOVA’s computerized model for classes is not only flawed, but possibly detrimental to the district’s best interests. Firstly, even if NOVA’s reduced dropout rate was reduced because of computerized instruction, the editorial conveniently forgets to mention by how much the dropout rate declined. If it was by a paltry margin of no statistical significance, then by having other schools in the district reapportion their budgets to do the same makes it impossible for those schools to use those same funds for important initiatives such as tackling food insecurity or buying school supplies for students who can’t afford them. In order for these schools to make a logical decision on the worth of such an initiative, they have to know by how much the dropout rate at NOVA fell. Even then, it’s a gamble to make a decision on a costly program involving computerized instruction since what worked in NOVA might now work in all schools. However, in such a case having such data could at least allow other schools in the district to make an educated decision on whether or not such instruction was worthwhile.
While it is laudable that NOVA saw its dropout rates decline, and all schools should aim to see the same, attributing the decline to computerized instruction is dubious at best. The district must be careful with how it spends the limited resources it has and without further consideration should not hastily adopt this measure.
The following appeared as part of a newspaper 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 grater 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 in the editorial posits that the introduction of computerized instruction at NOVA high school led to a decline in the school’s dropout rate, consequently arguing that such instruction ought to be adopted across all schools in the district. This line of reasoning, is seriously flawed for several reasons, mainly because it attributes certain effects to factors that we cannot definitively say caused them.
The most glaring error in the logic the editorial uses is the idea that the use of computerized instruction definitively led to a reduction in the dropout rate in NOVA high school. The computerized instruction, so lauded by the editorial, was only provided in three subjects at NOVA high school meaning that the reduced dropout rate could stem from improved instruction in other classes where it was not used. Moreover, even in the classes that such instruction was used, definitively concluding that computerized instruction was the cause of increased student success with the information given is a tenous argument. For example, studies have shown that if teachers adopt a practice known as “teaching a growth mindset”, wherein all they do is simply encourage the students by telling them they are capable of growing academically and reinforcing that idea constantly, students improve their grades. In such a scenario, computerized instruction may have been present but the sole catalyst in student improvement and a lower dropout rate was purely psychological and unrelated to such instruction. Additional information such as a survey conducted among students who received computerized instruction and those that didn’t would allow us to gain a better understanding of whether or not such instruction positively affected their academic performance. Even with such information, however, it is difficult to make a sweeping conclusion on such instruction’s effect on the dropout rate since a whole plethora of social, environmental, and internal factors can affect an individual student’s grades.
The logical leaps the editorial makes bounds even further when considering its overall conclusion. Saying that every school in the district should adopt NOVA’s computerized model for classes is not only flawed, but possibly detrimental to the district’s best interests. Firstly, even if NOVA’s reduced dropout rate was reduced because of computerized instruction, the editorial conveniently forgets to mention by how much the dropout rate declined. If it was by a paltry margin of no statistical significance, then by having other schools in the district reapportion their budgets to do the same makes it impossible for those schools to use those same funds for important initiatives such as tackling food insecurity or buying school supplies for students who can’t afford them. In order for these schools to make a logical decision on the worth of such an initiative, they have to know by how much the dropout rate at NOVA fell. Even then, it’s a gamble to make a decision on a costly program involving computerized instruction since what worked in NOVA might now work in all schools. However, in such a case having such data could at least allow other schools in the district to make an educated decision on whether or not such instruction was worthwhile.
While it is laudable that NOVA saw its dropout rates decline, and all schools should aim to see the same, attributing the decline to computerized instruction is dubious at best. The district must be careful with how it spends the limited resources it has and without further consideration should not hastily adopt this measure.
15 Aug 2019, 22:22
Kudos
Bookmarks
asurih - Welcome to GMAT Club.
I believe your AWA attempt is pretty good; you've substantiated your points well, and there are barely any grammar errors. Overall, it's a great essay and you'd easily get an AWA score of 5 or above. You no longer need to worry about AWA. Please make sure to proofread your essay on the real GMAT for a minimum of 2 min. All the best.
I believe your AWA attempt is pretty good; you've substantiated your points well, and there are barely any grammar errors. Overall, it's a great essay and you'd easily get an AWA score of 5 or above. You no longer need to worry about AWA. Please make sure to proofread your essay on the real GMAT for a minimum of 2 min. All the best.
15 Aug 2019, 23:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hey, It's a great essay. You have provided great examples to explain your point. This AWA is definitely above 5.
All the best.
All the best.
