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!
02 Apr 2023, 15:49
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hello. Would love to get any feedback on my AWA essay. Hoping to take the test next week!
The following appeared as part of a campaign statement for Velazquez, who is seeking election as alderman in the town of Barchester:
“Under Police Commissioner Draco, the city of Spartanburg began jailing people for committing petty crimes such as littering, shoplifting, and spraying graffiti. Criminals in Spartanburg must have understood that lawlessness would no longer be tolerated, because the following year Spartanburg saw a 20% drop in violent crimes such as homicide. Our town should learn from Commissioner Draco’s success, and begin a large-scale crackdown on petty crime.”
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.
Your Response:
Velazquez argues that the town of Barchester should start to change the way they punish petty crime. She thinks this is a good idea because a Police Commissioner in the town of Spartanburg started sentencing jail time to petty crime offenders and the town had a 20% drop in violent crimes. Although this seems like a good idea, there is no proof that a large-scale crackdown on petty crime in Barchester would have a positive effect, let alone the same effect as in Spartanburg. There are many reasons implementing a new plan against petty crime in Barchester would not be of benefit. I will outline these reasons in this paper.
First, Velazquez surrounds her argument around a very ambiguous statement. She doesn't provide any insights into what actions should be taken in Barchester. She does not make it clear whether she wants to follow the exact same plan as Commissioner Draco or just do something similar. Although unintentional, she may leave out some of the most important methods that Commissioner Draco used, thus making no positive difference for the town of Barchester. It would be helpful to understand what she intends on changing and how that relates to the other plan.
Even if there was a specific and similar plan in place, there is no proof that the actions against petty crime were the reason for a drop in violent crimes. In this argument, Velazquez is implying causation with only proof of correlation. She even says that the criminals "must have understood", which makes it obvious that she is just assuming that this was the case. There could have been a simultaneous effort to focus on violent crimes in Spartanburg, which would have been much more likely to lead to the decrease. Overall, nothing in this statement provides a causal relationship which weakens the argument that a similar effort in Barchester would cause any positive effects.
Another problem is that the data is very weakly represented and is not sufficient to support any of the claims. For example, a 20% drop could mean the number of violent crimes went from 5 to 4. This situation would not imply any great impact. There is also no data from previous years, which could have strengthened the argument if provided. The previous year could have been a 20% or more surge in violent crimes, thus making the following year even to or even worse than the past 10 or 20 years. This would have represented regression to the mean more than a result of the efforts against petty crime.
Velazquez attempts to outlines how a previous example can serve as a guideline to achieve similar results for a separate case in the future. However, she does so through an ambiguous statement and she offers weak evidence and insufficient data to support this statement. Therefore, her argument is not well reasoned and needs a lot more information to be more logically sound.
The following appeared as part of a campaign statement for Velazquez, who is seeking election as alderman in the town of Barchester:
“Under Police Commissioner Draco, the city of Spartanburg began jailing people for committing petty crimes such as littering, shoplifting, and spraying graffiti. Criminals in Spartanburg must have understood that lawlessness would no longer be tolerated, because the following year Spartanburg saw a 20% drop in violent crimes such as homicide. Our town should learn from Commissioner Draco’s success, and begin a large-scale crackdown on petty crime.”
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.
Your Response:
Velazquez argues that the town of Barchester should start to change the way they punish petty crime. She thinks this is a good idea because a Police Commissioner in the town of Spartanburg started sentencing jail time to petty crime offenders and the town had a 20% drop in violent crimes. Although this seems like a good idea, there is no proof that a large-scale crackdown on petty crime in Barchester would have a positive effect, let alone the same effect as in Spartanburg. There are many reasons implementing a new plan against petty crime in Barchester would not be of benefit. I will outline these reasons in this paper.
First, Velazquez surrounds her argument around a very ambiguous statement. She doesn't provide any insights into what actions should be taken in Barchester. She does not make it clear whether she wants to follow the exact same plan as Commissioner Draco or just do something similar. Although unintentional, she may leave out some of the most important methods that Commissioner Draco used, thus making no positive difference for the town of Barchester. It would be helpful to understand what she intends on changing and how that relates to the other plan.
Even if there was a specific and similar plan in place, there is no proof that the actions against petty crime were the reason for a drop in violent crimes. In this argument, Velazquez is implying causation with only proof of correlation. She even says that the criminals "must have understood", which makes it obvious that she is just assuming that this was the case. There could have been a simultaneous effort to focus on violent crimes in Spartanburg, which would have been much more likely to lead to the decrease. Overall, nothing in this statement provides a causal relationship which weakens the argument that a similar effort in Barchester would cause any positive effects.
Another problem is that the data is very weakly represented and is not sufficient to support any of the claims. For example, a 20% drop could mean the number of violent crimes went from 5 to 4. This situation would not imply any great impact. There is also no data from previous years, which could have strengthened the argument if provided. The previous year could have been a 20% or more surge in violent crimes, thus making the following year even to or even worse than the past 10 or 20 years. This would have represented regression to the mean more than a result of the efforts against petty crime.
Velazquez attempts to outlines how a previous example can serve as a guideline to achieve similar results for a separate case in the future. However, she does so through an ambiguous statement and she offers weak evidence and insufficient data to support this statement. Therefore, her argument is not well reasoned and needs a lot more information to be more logically sound.
03 Apr 2023, 10:15
Kudos
Bookmarks
AWA Score: 5.5 out of 6
Coherence and Connectivity: 5.5/6
The essay is well-structured and organized, with a clear introduction and conclusion. The ideas are logically presented, and the essay shows a good understanding of the prompt. The paragraphs flow smoothly, and the essay is easy to follow.
Word Structure: 6/6
The writer demonstrates a good command of vocabulary and word choice, using appropriate terminology to convey their ideas. The sentences are well-constructed, varied, and effective in conveying meaning.
Paragraph Structure and Formation: 5.5/6
The essay is well-structured, with each paragraph focusing on a specific idea and developing it coherently. The writer effectively uses topic sentences and transitions to connect the ideas and maintain the coherence of the essay.
Language and Grammar: 6/6
The essay is well-written with no major errors in grammar, punctuation, or syntax. The writer uses a range of sentence structures effectively, and the writing is clear, concise, and effective in conveying their ideas.
Vocabulary and Word Expression: 5.5/6
The writer uses a good range of vocabulary and word expressions, choosing appropriate words to convey their ideas. The essay could benefit from some more advanced vocabulary in some areas, but overall, it is effective in conveying meaning.
Coherence and Connectivity: 5.5/6
The essay is well-structured and organized, with a clear introduction and conclusion. The ideas are logically presented, and the essay shows a good understanding of the prompt. The paragraphs flow smoothly, and the essay is easy to follow.
Word Structure: 6/6
The writer demonstrates a good command of vocabulary and word choice, using appropriate terminology to convey their ideas. The sentences are well-constructed, varied, and effective in conveying meaning.
Paragraph Structure and Formation: 5.5/6
The essay is well-structured, with each paragraph focusing on a specific idea and developing it coherently. The writer effectively uses topic sentences and transitions to connect the ideas and maintain the coherence of the essay.
Language and Grammar: 6/6
The essay is well-written with no major errors in grammar, punctuation, or syntax. The writer uses a range of sentence structures effectively, and the writing is clear, concise, and effective in conveying their ideas.
Vocabulary and Word Expression: 5.5/6
The writer uses a good range of vocabulary and word expressions, choosing appropriate words to convey their ideas. The essay could benefit from some more advanced vocabulary in some areas, but overall, it is effective in conveying meaning.
kevin223
Moderator:
