Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2512:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
Apr 2601:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
Learn how Keshav, a Chartered Accountant, scored an impressive 705 on GMAT in just 30 days with GMATWhiz's expert guidance. In this video, he shares preparation tips and strategies that worked for him, including the mock, time management, and more.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
May 0111:00 AM PDT
-12:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
27 Sep 2022, 09:59
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi Can someone please review my practice essay.
“During a recent trial period in which government inspections at selected meat-processing plants were more frequent, the number of bacteria in samples of processed chicken decreased by 50 percent on average from the previous year’s level. If the government were to institute more frequent inspections, the incidence of stomach and intestinal infections throughout the country could thus be cut in half. In the meantime, consumers of Excel Meats should be safe from infection because Excel’s main processing plant has shown more improvement in eliminating bacterial contamination than any other plant cited in the government report.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
The argument claims that if there are frequent government inspections ate the meat processing plants then it results in decreased number of bacteria in processed chicken. The author uses this claim to conclude that if the number of inspections increased then the incidence of stomach and intestinal infection will decrease to half. The conclusion of the argument relies on the assumption for which there is no clear evidence. Hence the argument is not fully convincing.
First the argument corelates the increased government inspections with decreased number of bacteria in processed chicken without any proper evidence. There can be a case that the decrease resulted from some other factor such as change in environmental conditions or may be some new pesticide is launched in the market which is very effective. The argument would have been much clearer if it explicitly mentioned relating the effect of increased government inspection and meat processing plants such as meat processing plants were careless and they became more careful towards bacteria growth after the frequent inspections.
Second, the argument assumes that increased inspections will also result in reduced incidence of stomach and intestinal infections. This statement is a stretch since there can be other reasons for the infection. For example, even if inspections resulted in reduced number of bacteria on processed chicken, but the number of bacteria is still sufficient to cause infection. The argument would have been clearer if it had taken into account whether significant number of bacteria are reduced or not. Hence, the assumption that argument makes about Excel Meats is also flawed.
Finally, if we get the information about clear evidence that government inspections effect the number of bacteria and about number of bacteria that causes the intestinal infection and number of bacteria after reduction then we can arrive at a clearer conclusion.
To conclude, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and is there for unconvincing. It could be clearly strengthened if we get to know the relevant facts. Without those facts, the argument remains open to debate.
“During a recent trial period in which government inspections at selected meat-processing plants were more frequent, the number of bacteria in samples of processed chicken decreased by 50 percent on average from the previous year’s level. If the government were to institute more frequent inspections, the incidence of stomach and intestinal infections throughout the country could thus be cut in half. In the meantime, consumers of Excel Meats should be safe from infection because Excel’s main processing plant has shown more improvement in eliminating bacterial contamination than any other plant cited in the government report.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
The argument claims that if there are frequent government inspections ate the meat processing plants then it results in decreased number of bacteria in processed chicken. The author uses this claim to conclude that if the number of inspections increased then the incidence of stomach and intestinal infection will decrease to half. The conclusion of the argument relies on the assumption for which there is no clear evidence. Hence the argument is not fully convincing.
First the argument corelates the increased government inspections with decreased number of bacteria in processed chicken without any proper evidence. There can be a case that the decrease resulted from some other factor such as change in environmental conditions or may be some new pesticide is launched in the market which is very effective. The argument would have been much clearer if it explicitly mentioned relating the effect of increased government inspection and meat processing plants such as meat processing plants were careless and they became more careful towards bacteria growth after the frequent inspections.
Second, the argument assumes that increased inspections will also result in reduced incidence of stomach and intestinal infections. This statement is a stretch since there can be other reasons for the infection. For example, even if inspections resulted in reduced number of bacteria on processed chicken, but the number of bacteria is still sufficient to cause infection. The argument would have been clearer if it had taken into account whether significant number of bacteria are reduced or not. Hence, the assumption that argument makes about Excel Meats is also flawed.
Finally, if we get the information about clear evidence that government inspections effect the number of bacteria and about number of bacteria that causes the intestinal infection and number of bacteria after reduction then we can arrive at a clearer conclusion.
To conclude, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and is there for unconvincing. It could be clearly strengthened if we get to know the relevant facts. Without those facts, the argument remains open to debate.
27 Sep 2022, 23:58
Kudos
Bookmarks
AWA Score: 5.5 - 6 out of 6
Coherence and connectivity: 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!
Coherence and connectivity: 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 Luck
BansalT
Moderator:
