On average, 9 out of every 1,000 passengers who traveled on Avia Airli

Question

“On average, 9 out of every 1,000 passengers who traveled on Avia Airlines last year filed a complaint about our baggage-handling procedures. This means that although some 1 percent of our passengers were unhappy with those procedures, the overwhelming majority were quite satisfied with them; thus it would appear that a review of the procedures is not important to our goal of maintaining or increasing the number of Avia’s passengers.”

The argument given above quotes a statistic detailing the number of passengers on Avia Airlines who have logged a complaint about their baggage-handling procedures. The writer, writing on behalf of Avia Airlines, then wrongly interprets the result of the data and formulates the conclusion that the airline does not need to review its procedures because its customers are content with the current procedures. The assumptions employed by the writer are flawed and overlook a number of factors, which is why the argument built on top of these assumptions is not well reasoned.

First, the writer talks about how only 9 out of every 1000 passengers filed a complaint about the airline’s baggage handling procedures. The writer concludes that the remaining majority of customers are quite satisfied with their procedures. However, the reasoning for this conclusion is flawed because the writer overlooks certain important points. It isn’t necessary that all the people who have not complained against the procedures are satisfied with them. The complaint procedure might be too tedious for them, they might not have the time to file a complaint due to their appointments or they might just be unmotivated to file a complaint. The majority of people that the airline considers are satisfied with its performance, can easily fall into any one of these categories.

Second, the writer then concludes that it isn’t necessary for the airline to review its procedures to maintain or even increase its passengers. Now even if we assume that the vast majority is actually satisfied with the current procedures, it isn’t necessary that the company would increase the number of passengers by just continuing with these procedures. There could be other airlines that improve their operations and thus obtain a greater market share. Hence the airline backs its conclusion upon a flawed interpretation, which even if were right wouldn’t completely make the conclusion appear well reasoned.

The argument presented can be made more substantial and solid by taking into account the various factors that have been overlooked and then correctly interpreting data. Only then will the writer be able to form a sound argument based on the data and its interpretation. 
 
 Can someone please evaluate this for me, this is one of my first attempts at AWA.  
Thanks a lot.

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Welcome to GMAT Club!

AWA Score: 5 out of 6!

I have used a GMATAWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay.

Coherence and connectivity: 3.5/5  
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: 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: 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 Luck

sumitkrocks · Answer

Structure is good, but flow of message has potential to be improved.

jim441 · Answer

Hi  Sajjad1994 , can you pleasae evaluate the essay.

The argument claims that the review of the baggage-handling procedures is not required to the Avia airlines' goal of maintaining or increasing the number of passengers. The conclusion of the argument is based on the premise that only 1 percent of the passengers filed a complaint regarding these procedures last year. The conclusion of the argument is based on the assumption for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.

First, the argument has mentioned that only 9 out of every 1000 passengers of Avia Airlines have filed a complaint regarding baggage-handling procedures and are the only ones who are unhappy with such procedures. The argument has made a fraudlent assumption that people who have not filed a complaint are satisfied or happy with such procedures. It is very likely that most of the people are really unhappy with the procedures, and yet they didn't filed any complaint against these procedures. If this is the case then the conclusion of the argument will fall apart.

Second, the argument has assumed that the majority of the people who didn't filed a complaint regarding these procedures are fully satisfied by the baggage service provided by the Avia Airlines. However, it is quite possible that most of these people have gone through some baggage handling related issues. They even verbally reported the issue to the airlines officials but the airlines officials resolved the issues of such passangers then and there. In such situations, there won't be any written complaint in the system. So, more data is required in order to properly draw the conclusion of the argument.

Finally, the argument has made a fraudulent assumption that since very few passangers have filed a complaint regarding baggage handling procedures, so these procedures are very good and don't need any review or improvement. It is quite possible that due to such procedures, the mentioned passengers have faced these issues and in future, these issues are likely to rise even more. In such scenerio, the review of the procedures is very much needed, and it fill further help in the goal of airlines.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed for above mentioned reasons and is thus unconvincing. Based on the given premises, it can't be concluded that the review of the baggage handling procedures is not required by the airlines. Without any further data and knowledge, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open for debate.

Sajjad1994 · Answer

AWA Score: 5.5 out of 6

Coherence and Connectivity: 5/6
The essay presents a well-connected argument that progresses logically from one point to the next. However, there are a few instances where the essay could benefit from more explicit transitional phrases to clarify the connections between ideas.

Word structure: 6/6
The essay uses a variety of sentence structures and effectively communicates the author's points with clarity and precision.

Paragraph structure and formation: 5/6
The essay effectively uses paragraph breaks to signal shifts in topic or focus. However, some paragraphs could be more focused and tightly organized around a single main idea.

Language and Grammar: 6/6
The essay demonstrates strong command of grammar and usage, and effectively communicates the author's points with clarity and precision.

Vocabulary and Word Expression: 5.5/6
The essay uses a range of vocabulary appropriate to the topic and effectively communicates the author's points with clarity and precision. However, there are a few instances where more precise or nuanced word choices could enhance the essay's impact.

On average, 9 out of every 1,000 passengers who traveled on Avia Airli

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards