AWA Score: 5.5 out of 6
Coherence and connectivity: 5.5/6
The essay presents a well-structured argument with clear reasoning and evidence. The ideas are logically connected, and the essay is easy to follow.
Word structure: 5/6
The writer uses a good range of vocabulary and effectively constructs sentences. However, there are a few minor errors and awkward phrasings.
Paragraph structure and formation: 6/6
The paragraphs are well-formed and follow a clear structure. Each paragraph contains a main idea and provides evidence to support it.
Language and Grammar: 6/6
The essay demonstrates a good command of language and grammar. The sentences are well-constructed, and there are few errors.
Vocabulary and word expression: 5/6
The essay employs a good range of vocabulary, but there is room for improvement. The writer could use more advanced and varied vocabulary to enhance the essay's sophistication.
Overall, the essay presents a well-reasoned argument that effectively analyzes the flaws in the presented report. The essay demonstrates strong coherence and connectivity, well-formed paragraphs, and effective language and grammar. There is room for improvement in vocabulary and word expression. The essay's score is 5.5 out of 6.
Chimoma wrote:
The following appeared in a report presented for discussion at a meeting of the directors of a company that manufactures parts for heavy machinery:
“The falling revenues that the company is experiencing coincide with delays in manufacturing. These delays, in turn, are due in large part to poor planning in purchasing metals. Consider further that the manager of the department that handles purchasing of raw materials has an excellent background in general business, psychology, and sociology, but knows little about the properties of metals. The company should, therefore, move the purchasing manager to the sales department and bring in a scientist from the research division to be manager of the purchasing department.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
Analysis:
The argument that moving the purchasing manager to the sales department and bringing in a scientist from the research division to solve the problem of falling revenues omits some important concerns that must be addressed to substantiate the argument. The use of the manager’s lack of knowledge in the area of the properties of metals to justify his or her removal does not provide support that the scientist will do better in their stead. This information alone does not constitute a logical argument in favor of the manager’s removal, and it does not provide support for the main argument.
Most importantly, the argument does not address the reason why it is necessary for a manager of the purchasing department to understand the properties of metals, the qualities of a manager needed to properly lead the department, or the status of other divisions of the company. First, the argument assumes that the cause of falling revenues is ultimately due to the manager’s lack of knowledge concerning the properties of metals. However, there is no clear indication given that this lack of knowledge caused the poor planning. It is possible that the manager delayed obtaining proper approval to purchase the raw materials necessary for manufacturing. Thus, ultimately delaying the purchase of metals.
Second, the argument never addresses the performance of the manager in other necessary areas such as employee management. As stated in the report, the manager has an excellent background in general business, psychology, and sociology, which are all excellent qualities to have when it comes to managing a team. If the scientist the company plans to move to the purchasing division lacks these qualities, it may lead to greater levels of employee dissatisfaction and may ultimately affect the company’s revenues.
Finally, if the performance of the other divisions of the company is falling, the problem of falling revenues cannot be solved by moving the manager and bringing in a scientist from one division to another. The argument also does not also address the impact external factors such as climate change or the state of the country’s economy have on the company’s revenue.
Because the argument leaves out several key issues, it is not sound or convincing. If it included the items discussed above instead of solely explaining the manager’s lack of knowledge, the argument would have been more thorough and convincing. The argument could be considerably strengthened if the author clearly mentioned all the relevant facts. In order to assess the merits of a certain situation, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors.