GMAT Question of the Day: Daily via email | Daily via Instagram New to GMAT Club? Watch this Video

 It is currently 22 Feb 2020, 18:27

### 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

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Please provide feedback for my awa. +1 Kudos for constructive feedback

Author Message
Intern
Joined: 14 Dec 2018
Posts: 16
Please provide feedback for my awa. +1 Kudos for constructive feedback  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Jan 2020, 08:00
“In a recent citywide poll, fifteen percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our city’s art museums has increased by a similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports public television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, we can expect that attendance at our city’s museums will also start to decrease. Thus some of the city’s funds supporting arts should be reallocated to public television.”

The argument made by the city's council claims that as the funding for public television where visual arts programs appear is being threatened with severe cuts, the city's art museums will see a decrease in attendance. The argument goes on to state that the city should reallocate some it's funding for arts to public television. The argument is making an effort to correlate the art programs on television to the art museum's attendance which on the surface may seem to make sense. However, the argument is making a leap of faith and giving too much credit to public television for the increased attendance in art museums without much data or evidence to back up the claim. Hence, the argument is rather weak.
Firstly, the argument claims that fifteen percent more people watch television programs about the visual arts and visit more art museums than five years ago. However, the argument fails to mention whether the people who view television programs are the ones going to the museum as well. It is possible that the television program's viewership has increased due to the quality of the program. It is also possible that the attendance of the art museum has increased, but it is impossible to deduce whether the increase in attendance is due to the television programs or other factors such as the arrival of new and unique artwork in the museum.
Secondly, the argument states that corporate funding for public television programs is under threat of cuts. It is important to note that generally, only the programs which experience a decrease in viewership are removed from television. If we believe that the viewership of arts programs has gone up, then the likelihood of the programs being canceled reduces. Moreover, the public television programs are just being threatened currently, and the funding has not actually been taken away. It is hard to claim that the art museum's attendance will reduce until a decline in attendance is noticed after the television programs are suspended.
Thirdly, if one does believe that the television programs are what made people visit the museums, what is there to claim that their interest is now not permanent but would vanish with the decrease in television programs. Furthermore, the argument does not consider that if the city does allocate funds for public television, it will have far fewer funds available for the museum. The low funds will affect the quality of the museum and will likely further reduce the attendance.
In conclusion, the argument fails to consider many key factors and hence, is unconvincing in it's claim that the city's funds for arts should be reallocated to public television. The argument could be strengthened if it can be proven that television programs are indeed what is influencing the decision of people to visit the museums.

Thank you so much for taking out the time to read my AWA. Your constructive feedback will immensely help me improve my chances of doing well in my GMAT exam. This will be my second try and I want to do my best.

Regards,
Deeksha
Retired Moderator
Status: enjoying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 5312
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: Please provide feedback for my awa. +1 Kudos for constructive feedback  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Jan 2020, 07:37
1
Top Contributor
The argument made by the city's council claims that as the funding for public television where visual arts programs appear is being threatened with severe cuts, the city's art museums will see a decrease in attendance. The argument goes on to state that the city should reallocate some it's funding for arts to public television. The argument is making an effort to correlate the art programs on television to the art museum's attendance which on the surface may seem to make sense. However, the argument is making a leap of faith and giving too much credit to public television for the increased attendance in art museums without much data or evidence to back up the claim. Hence, the argument is rather weak.

Firstly, the argument claims that fifteen percent more people watch television programs about the visual arts and visit more art museums than five years ago. However, the argument fails to mention whether the people who view television programs are the ones going to the museum as well. It is possible that the television program's viewership has increased due to the quality of the program. It is also possible that the attendance of the art museum has increased, but it is impossible to deduce whether the increase in attendance is due to the television programs or other factors such as the arrival of new and unique artwork in the museum.

Secondly, the argument states that corporate funding for public television programs is under threat of cuts. It is important to note that generally, only the programs which experience a decrease in viewership are removed from television. If we believe that the viewership of arts programs has gone up, then the likelihood of the programs being canceled reduces. Moreover, the public television programs are just being threatened currently, and the funding has not actually been taken away. It is hard to claim that the art museum's attendance will reduce until a decline in attendance is noticed )after the television programs are suspended.

Thirdly, if one does believe that the television programs are what made people visit the museums, what is there to claim that their interest is now not permanent but would vanish with the decrease in television programs. Furthermore, the argument does not consider that if the city does allocate funds for public television, it will have far fewer funds available for the museum. The low funds will affect the quality of the museum and will likely further reduce the attendance.

In conclusion, the argument fails to consider many key factors and hence, is unconvincing in it's --its claim that the city's funds for arts should be reallocated to public television. The argument could be strengthened if it can be proven that television programs are indeed what is influencing the decision of people to visit the museums ( are influencing)

The Positives
Construction : Good
Length 535 words
Paragraphing: good.
Contents : cogent and easily flowing
Grammar and Spelling : very few mistakes

The Negatives

1. The biggest problem is the the sterotype of the essays. Please do not assume that the examiner is not aware of the repetitive essays. At least at the GMAT level, you are expected to be original in your ideas. This is a generic observation.
2. Style: Please avoid passive voice sentences as has been pointed out.
3. You must strive to emphasize the rhetoric in you by buttressing your arguments with examples, study reports, etc. You must definitely include at least one example and one study report (mostly imaginary I suppose )

example: In a survey conducted in the country of Redlands, it was found that 80% of the people headed straight ter chcking in to the City's Government run Museum to understand the ancient culture of the country.

example: This is similar to what happened in the historical city of Tiruchy in South India. The log book kept at the museum revealed that visitors came to the museum on their own rather than impelled by the local TV. ( Between you and me, there is no museum in the city of Tiruchy nor a captive TV program)
The parting shot: Generally The museum should benefit by a TV program. Ironically as per the city council's plan, the TV would seem to gain by the museum. It is a pity.

Rating: 5 -- can easily touch 6 with better in putts as suggested.
_________________
GMAT SC is not about just knowing either grammar or meaning. It is about applying your knowledge in the Test Hall, the art of GMAT SC-- If you want to learn that art, then either call +91 9884544509 or contact <newnaren@gmail.com>
Intern
Joined: 14 Dec 2018
Posts: 16
Re: Please provide feedback for my awa. +1 Kudos for constructive feedback  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Jan 2020, 20:55
daagh wrote:
The argument made by the city's council claims that as the funding for public television where visual arts programs appear is being threatened with severe cuts, the city's art museums will see a decrease in attendance. The argument goes on to state that the city should reallocate some it's funding for arts to public television. The argument is making an effort to correlate the art programs on television to the art museum's attendance which on the surface may seem to make sense. However, the argument is making a leap of faith and giving too much credit to public television for the increased attendance in art museums without much data or evidence to back up the claim. Hence, the argument is rather weak.

Firstly, the argument claims that fifteen percent more people watch television programs about the visual arts and visit more art museums than five years ago. However, the argument fails to mention whether the people who view television programs are the ones going to the museum as well. It is possible that the television program's viewership has increased due to the quality of the program. It is also possible that the attendance of the art museum has increased, but it is impossible to deduce whether the increase in attendance is due to the television programs or other factors such as the arrival of new and unique artwork in the museum.

Secondly, the argument states that corporate funding for public television programs is under threat of cuts. It is important to note that generally, only the programs which experience a decrease in viewership are removed from television. If we believe that the viewership of arts programs has gone up, then the likelihood of the programs being canceled reduces. Moreover, the public television programs are just being threatened currently, and the funding has not actually been taken away. It is hard to claim that the art museum's attendance will reduce until a decline in attendance is noticed )after the television programs are suspended.

Thirdly, if one does believe that the television programs are what made people visit the museums, what is there to claim that their interest is now not permanent but would vanish with the decrease in television programs. Furthermore, the argument does not consider that if the city does allocate funds for public television, it will have far fewer funds available for the museum. The low funds will affect the quality of the museum and will likely further reduce the attendance.

In conclusion, the argument fails to consider many key factors and hence, is unconvincing in it's --its claim that the city's funds for arts should be reallocated to public television. The argument could be strengthened if it can be proven that television programs are indeed what is influencing the decision of people to visit the museums ( are influencing)

The Positives
Construction : Good
Length 535 words
Paragraphing: good.
Contents : cogent and easily flowing
Grammar and Spelling : very few mistakes

The Negatives

1. The biggest problem is the the sterotype of the essays. Please do not assume that the examiner is not aware of the repetitive essays. At least at the GMAT level, you are expected to be original in your ideas. This is a generic observation.
2. Style: Please avoid passive voice sentences as has been pointed out.
3. You must strive to emphasize the rhetoric in you by buttressing your arguments with examples, study reports, etc. You must definitely include at least one example and one study report (mostly imaginary I suppose )

example: In a survey conducted in the country of Redlands, it was found that 80% of the people headed straight ter chcking in to the City's Government run Museum to understand the ancient culture of the country.

example: This is similar to what happened in the historical city of Tiruchy in South India. The log book kept at the museum revealed that visitors came to the museum on their own rather than impelled by the local TV. ( Between you and me, there is no museum in the city of Tiruchy nor a captive TV program)
The parting shot: Generally The museum should benefit by a TV program. Ironically as per the city council's plan, the TV would seem to gain by the museum. It is a pity.

Rating: 5 -- can easily touch 6 with better in putts as suggested.

Thank you so much for your review. I will try to avoid passive voice, unfortunately I use passive voice a lot. I will definitely work harder on avoiding it.
I did not realize that we could use made-up examples. I thought the examples have to be from the real world. Thank you so much for clarifying this. I will definitely include more examples.
Re: Please provide feedback for my awa. +1 Kudos for constructive feedback   [#permalink] 27 Jan 2020, 20:55
Display posts from previous: Sort by