Hello Guys!
I would really appreciate if you can rate my AWA response. Just took the Veritas Mock CAT and I am reviewing this to get a sense of my current ability to do this section well.
My aim was to hit 400+ words (Done) and come up with a good counter example with some data points (Was not able to get this part all that well).
Thanks a lot for your time.
Essay Prompt:
The following appeared as part of an article reviewing summer camps for children.
Parents, if you need a summer camp for your children look no further than Federville Farms. In a recent survey, Federville Farms ranked first in both overall camper satisfaction and in food quality, and second in the variety of outdoor activities. Federville Farms has been family owned and operated for over forty years, so you have nothing to worry about when it comes to your child's safety, and it employs more Red Cross certified lifeguards than any other camp in the state. If you seek the best camp experience for your children, Federville Farms is the best choice you can make.
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
AWA Response:
The argument presents an advertisement of the Summer camp at Federville Farms and invites parents to take advantage of a highly rated camp, in terms of satisfaction, food quality and variety of outdoor activities. It cites that the camp at Federville Farms is also necessarily safer because it is has been family owned and operated for over forty years. Additionally it provides some evidence about the farm employing more Red Cross certified lifeguards than any other camp in the state. This piece of evidence is aimed to increase the perceived safety of the camp. The author concludes that the camp provides the safest and best summer camp experience in the state. The author however does not adequately explain the basis of this conclusion with substantial verifiable evidence.
Firstly, the author puts forward a hypothesis that because the farm is family owned and operated for over forty years, the child camper's safety is guaranteed. This is an illogical conclusion based on no concrete evidence to support it. There have been no conclusive data to say that family owned camps are safer than corporate owned camps. Furthermore, the author suggests that the presence of Red Cross certified lifeguards on camp grounds is a good indicator that the camp is a safe experience. This piece of evidence does more to damage the claim than support it. The need for having so many lifeguards on the camp grounds begs the question of camp safety in itself. Why would a camp need several lifeguards if there was no perceived threat to life? It indicates that the activities at the camp are risky and may involve the child to be rescued by a life guard. And therefore it may be incorrect to advertise such a camp as a "safe" one to parents without a full disclosure of all activities in greater detail.
The argument may benefit from providing substantial verifiable evidence that could enable parents to compare camp safety across the state. Such evidence might constitute the average number of accidents each year in all camps, safety procedures followed in the camp, typical response times to attend to minor injuries and the camp's proximity to emergency medical care if needed. The advertisement should also list all the activities in detail so parents can make an informed decision considering the program's appropriateness to their child's ability and interests. Further more, listing the ingredients in their food may also help parents of children with allergies make alternate arrangements for food or entirely forego a risky camp option for their child.