AWA Score: 4 out of 6!
I have used a GMATAWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay.
Coherence and connectivity: 2.5/5
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: 4.5/5
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 Luckpkbiet wrote:
Please review my essay. Thanks in advance
Q: Prompt: “Two of today’s best‐selling brands of full‐strength prescription medication for the relief of excess stomach acid, Acid‐Ease and Pepticaid, are now available in milder nonprescription forms. Doctors have written 76 million more prescriptions for full‐strength Acid‐Ease than for full‐strength Pepticaid. So people who need an effective but milder nonprescription medication for the relief of excess stomach acid should choose Acid‐Ease.”
Essay Format
The argument debates that medicine which were generally scheduled to be sold under a registered medical practitioner is now available in a much milder version and non prescription format for public at large. So people who need medicine without any prescription reference from doctor can directly avail from pharmacy. This statement seems good initially but genuinely is doubtful. Without any reference or from medical authority statement, it can seems much of a scrupulous activity. Lack of support, evidences and claims is inconclusive of the hypothesis and is a leap of the faith which has clearly no outcomes..
First, the author states that medicines which were sold by doctors or registered medical practitioners are now available at pharmacy in a milder version. This statement can be attractive but is really doubtful. Any medicine which were sold by pharmacy under prescription of medical specialist must have been of some great importance and reference. It cannot be a simple headache or cold pill. Consumption of such medicine can be really dangerous depending on the damage it can do over pain creating enzymes. Also the side effect post consumption has been failed to be addressed which is really a matter of concern.
Second, the author has strengthened his position by stating that doctors have written over 76 million of such prescription and is thus safe for consumption, but again the author fails to address the type of patients doctors have refereed this medicine or the type of disease this was effective in treating. Comparing oranges with oranges is too effective but comparing something with unknown can attribute to disaster if things go wrong. Stated in such a way, this statement is really a refutal to all medical prescription laws as per any international medical agency
Third, the author has failed to understand the human life value and its impact on any one. A loss of human can be a data for any government or authority but it can be a loss of world to a family which can immediately perish for future. So, before referring to anyone for medicines that were used by doctors to some patients and not knowing about criticality of patients, medicine efficacy and usage with side effects it is really novice to state in this regard.
In conclusion, the argument remains flawed for the reasons cited above. The author should present facts corroborated with relevant facts and developments if any. From the facts presented by author, he should have tried to have a holistic survey with a large number of respondents. In order to access the merit of the certain situation the author should have full access of the knowledge and measures to increase the same. Without this information the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.