AWA Score: 4-4.5 out of 6
I have used a GMAT AWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay.
Coherence and connectivity: 3/5
This rating corresponds to the flow of ideas and expressions from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analyzed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.
Paragraph structure and formation: 2/5
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs are evaluated. To score well on this parameter, it is important to organize the attempt into paragraphs. Preferable to follow the convention of leaving a line blank at the end of each paragraph, to make the software aware of the structure of the essay.
Vocabulary and word expression: 4.5/5
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocabulary possessed by the candidate basis the word and expression usage. There are no extra- points for bombastic word usage. Simple is the best form of suave!
Good LuckGmatn00b007 wrote:
The following appeared as part of a mayor's proposal to the city council:
Traffic in the central city is the number one complaint of our residents, so I urge you to consider this solution. We should invest in doubling our bus service and adding a light rail system, giving more options to those who don't want to drive through the city. Furthermore, we should make public transportation more accessible by reducing the fees to ride. With less traffic, people will be more productive, and with higher productivity comes higher revenue and more taxes, so the system will likely pay for itself.
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
The above reasoning that the city should invest in more public transport, doubling the bus services or by adding a light rail system, so as to reduce the traffic is poorly reasoned for the following reasons:
I will start by saying that the construction time and space required to make the light rail system will create more traffic and nuisance for the residents of the city. Till the time the construction has not been completed, a minimum of 4 to 5 years, the citizens will face immense traffic on or near the roads where the construction for the rail system and stations is to be created. The same would go for additional bus stops but for these, the construction time will be within a couple of months. Although, after the construction, the traffic on the road should decrease but till then the traffic will get denser.
We are said that to increase the accessibility the city should decrease the fairs but we have no idea on what the old fairs were and if it helped keep the pubic transport profitable. Now, when we add onto the costs spent on construction and purchase of new transportation system we cannot say with certainty that the new system will be profitable or even recover the costs incurred.
Another point that the argument states is that less traffic will increase productivity which will then lead to increased revenue and more taxes. I disagree! I will give a hypothetical situation to prove my point, let’s say that we have successfully implemented all the rail routes and new bus stops and we are having a footfall and have decreased the traffic. As these are public transports, they will not be able to have pick-up and drop spots at every location and the users might have to travel to their offices and homes from the central stop location near their offices or homes, this will lead to a lot of time and wastage of energy. And if we are able to get a lot of users in the public transport which could also lead to overcrowding and possibly missing a few bus/trains before reaching to the final destination. This will result in frustration. These two reasons will be quite crucial to point that adding onto new systems might not increase productivity.
We also need to consider the willingness of the residents of the city and what kind of safety this new public transport will offer for them to use this service frequently.
Although these were the points that I found to not be strong enough to make it a complete judgment, There were a few good points like, for the people who are willing to travel intercity or long distance or even for people who don’t want to drive around in the traffic, it will be useful for them.
In conclusion, I believe we will need to get the answers for the first 4 points to make a sound decision as to whether adding to the public transport system will be a good decision or not.