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.
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
21 Dec 2015, 10:12
Kudos
Bookmarks
“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 arts museums has increased by similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports public television, where most of 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.”
My essay below:-
The argument that some of the city’s funds for supporting arts should be reallocated to public television is weak and untenable.
The argument implies that the growth in the number of viewers of shows on visual arts is the reason the number of visitors to the city’s art museum have increased.
The major flaw with this argument is that it assigns a misplaced causality by implying that the increase in the number of visitors are linked to the increase in the viewership.
There could be two other possible situations besides what has been mentioned in the argument.
The argument fails to address the possibilities that the increase in viewership could be because of increased visitors to the art museums or even that there is no correlation between the two.
If the numbers of viewers are linked to the number of visitors, opposite to what the prompt argument suggests, then reduction in funds to the art museum can lead to a deterioration of quality of art exhibits, leading to reduced visitors to the museums and therefore further reduced viewers of the television programs.
Similarly, if there is no correlation between the number of viewers of television shows on visual arts and the number of visitors to art museums, then reallocation of funds away from museums is unjustified.
The argument could be strengthened by exploring and illustrating the correlation between the increase in visitors to art museums to the rise in viewers of television shows.
Only a strong correlation would justify reallocation of city funds from supporting the arts to public television.
However, as it stands, the argument is unsustainable.
My essay below:-
The argument that some of the city’s funds for supporting arts should be reallocated to public television is weak and untenable.
The argument implies that the growth in the number of viewers of shows on visual arts is the reason the number of visitors to the city’s art museum have increased.
The major flaw with this argument is that it assigns a misplaced causality by implying that the increase in the number of visitors are linked to the increase in the viewership.
There could be two other possible situations besides what has been mentioned in the argument.
The argument fails to address the possibilities that the increase in viewership could be because of increased visitors to the art museums or even that there is no correlation between the two.
If the numbers of viewers are linked to the number of visitors, opposite to what the prompt argument suggests, then reduction in funds to the art museum can lead to a deterioration of quality of art exhibits, leading to reduced visitors to the museums and therefore further reduced viewers of the television programs.
Similarly, if there is no correlation between the number of viewers of television shows on visual arts and the number of visitors to art museums, then reallocation of funds away from museums is unjustified.
The argument could be strengthened by exploring and illustrating the correlation between the increase in visitors to art museums to the rise in viewers of television shows.
Only a strong correlation would justify reallocation of city funds from supporting the arts to public television.
However, as it stands, the argument is unsustainable.
24 Dec 2015, 12:48
Kudos
Bookmarks
rohanr13
rohanr13
your essay would score a 4.5-5. yo can improve your structure. that might help to increase the score ..
i hope my post helps, let me now through the kudos button.
Moderator:
