abdb wrote:
Thanks Bharat, another one I wrote today. Lemme knw ur thoughts on this.
"In the first four years that Montoya has served as mayor of the city of San Perdito, the population has decreased
and the unemployment rate has increased. Two businesses have closed for each new business
that has opened. Under Varro, who served as mayor for four years before Montoya, the unemployment rate
decreased and the population increased. Clearly, the residents of San Perdito would be best served if they voted
Montoya out of office and reelected Varro."
Discuss how well reasoned ... etc.
The argument is not very well reasoned. It states that the unemployment rates have increased under mayor Montoya and people in the city will be served better by the previous mayor, Varro, under whom the unemployment rate declined. The argument assumes that the unemployment is the single most important indicator of the performance of a mayor. It does not consider other factors such as crime, security, healthcare, sanitation etc. While suggesting that Varro will be the best choice for the city as the new mayor the argument does not provide any information on the performance of Varro in the last four years. Also, while mentioning the unemployment rate, it does not consider other factors which might have impacted the economics of the city. These may include national level security, foreign investment environment, economic situation of the country, etc.
While the unemployment rate may have increased, the actual number of jobs might have risen (since population declined). Any evidence that the actual number of jobs increased will weaken the argument whereas contrary evidence will strengthen the argument. Hence, providing the actual numbers will help to evaluate the argument better. Also, while businesses may have closed at a rate double than that of the ones opened, it is not an exhaustive indicator of economic activity. It is possible that the economy of the city is more oriented towards the tertiary sector and people are winding up their businesses only to take up jobs. Also, the role of agriculture in the economy of the city also needs to be assessed to gain a better understanding of the economy.
The argument also does not consider external factors such as the stage of the economic cycle in the last four years, the foreign investment environment, national security and political issues, etc. all of which may have led to a poor economic performance despite measures taken by the mayor’s government
Any evidence on other factors than the economy, such as crime rate, literacy, healthcare, sanitation etc. will be important to understand the performance of the mayor. It is possible that while the economy would not have done remarkably well in the last four years. Other areas such as the ones mentioned above may have witnessed significant improvement. Hence, it is essential to look at the social welfare factors to better evaluate the claim in the argument.
Finally, it is important to understand the credentials of Varro to become the mayor in the new elections. The argument does not provide any information on Varro’s performance in the last four years and his ability to contest elections. It is possible that he would have done poorly in a weak socio-economic environment in the last four years too and hence may not be the best choice for the post.
Thus, the argument has a weak line of reasoning and is unconvincing. To determine the best choice for the mayor’s post, it may be useful to conduct a survey. Also, data on other factors will help to make the argument more logically sound and help answer the questions raised due to assumptions. Thus, a well-rounded analysis must be done to argue who should be the best choice for the mayor’s position.
Overall it is decent. But there is always room for improvement.
I personally felt that the first paragraph is not in a way it has to be. I suggest you to first paraphrase the argument and state author's line of reasoning- This tells the reader that you have understood the argument. Then state flaws and say the argument is flawed.
Starting with the sentence-The argument is not very well reasoned.- disappointed me. Because everyone know that the argument is flawed. Moreover, after the sentence you did not state why it is flawed immediately. You have paraphrased the argument.
Make sure that each sentence is connected to the previous/next sentence logically. I mean, when you read the essay, it has to be in a flow.
Anyway no worries..
AWA score is the one that schools use to check whether you or somebody else wrote the essays.
So keep it simple. Don't worry much about AWA(if you score 4.5 or 5) and concentrate more on the other sections which are crucial.
close
15 Feb 2014, 12:31
