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 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.
15 Jan 2024, 17:11
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi, I would greatly appreciate if someone could rate my essay on the 1-6 GMAT scale, thanks in advance!
Prompt: The following appeared in a report presented for discussion at a meeting of the directors of a company that manufactures parts for heavy machinery:
“The falling revenues that the company is experiencing coincide with delays in manufacturing. These delays, in turn, are due in large part to poor planning in purchasing metals. Consider further that the manager of the department that handles purchasing of raw materials has an excellent background in general business, psychology, and sociology, but knows little about the properties of metals. The company should, therefore, move the purchasing manager to the sales department and bring in a scientist from the research division to be manager of the purchasing department.”
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.
Essay:
In the aforementioned report, the argument proposes that the company should move the purchasing manager to the sales department and replace him/her with a scientist from the research division to be manager of the purchasing department. This argument, however, is based on a lack of concrete evidence and makes illogical jumps to conclusions. As a result, the argument is weak, unconvincing, and fails to make a solid case for its stance.
To begin with, the argument mentions that the falling revenues that the company is experiencing happen to coincide with delays in manufacturing, the delays of which happen to be due to poor planning in purchasing metals. However, there are many unconsidered factors that could main these coinciding events unrelated to each other. For example, despite manufacturing delays, it is possible that the manufacturing division of the company is actually making net profits at the moment while other departments are making net losses, resulting in the company overall making net losses and not profits. Therefore, this also proves that the poor planning in purchasing metals that is directly associated with the manufacturing delays have a strong possibility of not being related to the falling revenues either. Additionally, assuming the argument was correct in assuming that the 2 were related to each other, it is possible that the delays in manufacturing are actually a result of the falling revenues and not the other way around; this means that that the real issue would not be how manufacturing is scheduled, but in how the company’s revenue is falling, thereby concluding that the argument is actually focusing on the wrong issue. In order to better bolster its stance, the argument should provide more concrete evidence showing that the delayed manufacturing bears the brunt of the responsibility for the company’s shortcomings in revenue.
Secondly, the argument makes a note that the manager of the department that purchases raw materials does not have much knowledge regarding the properties of metals, as opposed to his/her excellent background in other fields like business and psychology. While on the surface, the argument presents something that could serve as an explanation to the delays in manufacturing, closer inspection reveals many flaws in the logic being derived from this statement. Firstly, if the manager is in charge of the department that purchases the goods, then knowing about the physical properties of metals is out of the relevant scope for the manager’s job; their responsibility is in the purchasing of these items, not the science behind them. On top of this, as mentioned in the last paragraph, the manager’s lacking of knowledge in metals has a high probability of having nothing to do with the delays in manufacturing. In fact, there are many factors in respect to this point that have not been considered, including rising prices of the materials needed to manufacture the company’s products or poor handling of the manufacturing itself by the staff responsible for building the products. The author of the argument should take time to dig deeper into who exactly is responsible for these shortcomings in the manufacturing area and figure out the root cause of these issues, rather than just assuming that someone is responsible without solid evidence backing these accusations.
Lastly, the argument suggests that the purchasing manager should be moved to the sales department while a scientist from the research division is put in charge of the purchasing department. Once again, however, the argument makes an illogical jump to a conclusion that has many flaws in its approach. Starting off, a scientist’s main day to day job involves conducting research and discovering new things about their specific area of expertise. In fact, scientists rarely ever deal with management or finances, meaning that the position of manager in a purchasing department is essentially completely out of their scope; it would thereby be more logical to find someone who actually has experience in management to take the position of manager of the purchasing department. However, because of all the holes in the logic mentioned in the previous 2 paragraphs, there is no guarantee that replacing the manager of the purchasing department, which as already discussed has a high chance of having nothing to do with the delays in manufacturing or the failing revenue, would have the effect the argument desires. Consequently, this conclusion is illogical and has no solid evidence to bolster its stance.
In conclusion, the argument fails to put together a cohesive and strong argument for its case, and relies on weak evidence and flaws in logic. In order to make a better case, the argument should spend more time researching all the different factors it missed in its first iteration and provide more solid, undeniable evidence supporting its claim.
Prompt: The following appeared in a report presented for discussion at a meeting of the directors of a company that manufactures parts for heavy machinery:
“The falling revenues that the company is experiencing coincide with delays in manufacturing. These delays, in turn, are due in large part to poor planning in purchasing metals. Consider further that the manager of the department that handles purchasing of raw materials has an excellent background in general business, psychology, and sociology, but knows little about the properties of metals. The company should, therefore, move the purchasing manager to the sales department and bring in a scientist from the research division to be manager of the purchasing department.”
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.
Essay:
In the aforementioned report, the argument proposes that the company should move the purchasing manager to the sales department and replace him/her with a scientist from the research division to be manager of the purchasing department. This argument, however, is based on a lack of concrete evidence and makes illogical jumps to conclusions. As a result, the argument is weak, unconvincing, and fails to make a solid case for its stance.
To begin with, the argument mentions that the falling revenues that the company is experiencing happen to coincide with delays in manufacturing, the delays of which happen to be due to poor planning in purchasing metals. However, there are many unconsidered factors that could main these coinciding events unrelated to each other. For example, despite manufacturing delays, it is possible that the manufacturing division of the company is actually making net profits at the moment while other departments are making net losses, resulting in the company overall making net losses and not profits. Therefore, this also proves that the poor planning in purchasing metals that is directly associated with the manufacturing delays have a strong possibility of not being related to the falling revenues either. Additionally, assuming the argument was correct in assuming that the 2 were related to each other, it is possible that the delays in manufacturing are actually a result of the falling revenues and not the other way around; this means that that the real issue would not be how manufacturing is scheduled, but in how the company’s revenue is falling, thereby concluding that the argument is actually focusing on the wrong issue. In order to better bolster its stance, the argument should provide more concrete evidence showing that the delayed manufacturing bears the brunt of the responsibility for the company’s shortcomings in revenue.
Secondly, the argument makes a note that the manager of the department that purchases raw materials does not have much knowledge regarding the properties of metals, as opposed to his/her excellent background in other fields like business and psychology. While on the surface, the argument presents something that could serve as an explanation to the delays in manufacturing, closer inspection reveals many flaws in the logic being derived from this statement. Firstly, if the manager is in charge of the department that purchases the goods, then knowing about the physical properties of metals is out of the relevant scope for the manager’s job; their responsibility is in the purchasing of these items, not the science behind them. On top of this, as mentioned in the last paragraph, the manager’s lacking of knowledge in metals has a high probability of having nothing to do with the delays in manufacturing. In fact, there are many factors in respect to this point that have not been considered, including rising prices of the materials needed to manufacture the company’s products or poor handling of the manufacturing itself by the staff responsible for building the products. The author of the argument should take time to dig deeper into who exactly is responsible for these shortcomings in the manufacturing area and figure out the root cause of these issues, rather than just assuming that someone is responsible without solid evidence backing these accusations.
Lastly, the argument suggests that the purchasing manager should be moved to the sales department while a scientist from the research division is put in charge of the purchasing department. Once again, however, the argument makes an illogical jump to a conclusion that has many flaws in its approach. Starting off, a scientist’s main day to day job involves conducting research and discovering new things about their specific area of expertise. In fact, scientists rarely ever deal with management or finances, meaning that the position of manager in a purchasing department is essentially completely out of their scope; it would thereby be more logical to find someone who actually has experience in management to take the position of manager of the purchasing department. However, because of all the holes in the logic mentioned in the previous 2 paragraphs, there is no guarantee that replacing the manager of the purchasing department, which as already discussed has a high chance of having nothing to do with the delays in manufacturing or the failing revenue, would have the effect the argument desires. Consequently, this conclusion is illogical and has no solid evidence to bolster its stance.
In conclusion, the argument fails to put together a cohesive and strong argument for its case, and relies on weak evidence and flaws in logic. In order to make a better case, the argument should spend more time researching all the different factors it missed in its first iteration and provide more solid, undeniable evidence supporting its claim.
16 Jan 2024, 09:03
Kudos
Bookmarks
AWA Score: 5 out of 6
Coherence and connectivity (5.5/6):
The essay demonstrates strong coherence and connectivity, as each paragraph logically builds upon the previous one. The introduction sets the stage for the critique, and subsequent paragraphs smoothly transition from one point to another. The author effectively uses transition words and phrases to guide the reader through the analysis, enhancing the overall flow of the essay.
Word structure (5/6):
The essay employs a varied and appropriate vocabulary, contributing to the overall clarity of the argument. Sentence structures are generally well-crafted, with a mix of simple and complex sentences. However, there are instances where sentence structure could be more concise and direct. Some sentences are lengthy and could benefit from simplification for better readability.
Paragraph structure and formation (5.5/6):
The essay follows a well-organized paragraph structure. Each paragraph begins with a clear topic sentence that introduces the main point, followed by supporting details and examples. The author maintains a consistent pattern, enhancing the essay's readability. The conclusion effectively summarizes the main points and reinforces the overall argument.
Language and Grammar (5/6):
The essay demonstrates a strong command of language and grammar. There are only minor grammatical errors, such as the use of "main" instead of "make" in the phrase "could main these coinciding events unrelated to each other." Additionally, there are a few instances of awkward phrasing that could be refined for smoother expression. Overall, language and grammar usage contribute positively to the clarity of the argument.
Vocabulary and word expression (5/6):
The vocabulary used is appropriate and effectively conveys the author's ideas. However, there are a few instances where word choices could be more precise or varied to enhance the overall richness of the essay. The expression of ideas is generally clear, and the author effectively conveys the critical analysis of the given argument.
Overall, this analytical writing assessment essay is well-structured and effectively critiques the provided argument. It demonstrates strong coherence, solid paragraph formation, and a good command of language and grammar. Minor improvements in sentence structure and vocabulary choice could enhance the overall quality of the essay.
Coherence and connectivity (5.5/6):
The essay demonstrates strong coherence and connectivity, as each paragraph logically builds upon the previous one. The introduction sets the stage for the critique, and subsequent paragraphs smoothly transition from one point to another. The author effectively uses transition words and phrases to guide the reader through the analysis, enhancing the overall flow of the essay.
Word structure (5/6):
The essay employs a varied and appropriate vocabulary, contributing to the overall clarity of the argument. Sentence structures are generally well-crafted, with a mix of simple and complex sentences. However, there are instances where sentence structure could be more concise and direct. Some sentences are lengthy and could benefit from simplification for better readability.
Paragraph structure and formation (5.5/6):
The essay follows a well-organized paragraph structure. Each paragraph begins with a clear topic sentence that introduces the main point, followed by supporting details and examples. The author maintains a consistent pattern, enhancing the essay's readability. The conclusion effectively summarizes the main points and reinforces the overall argument.
Language and Grammar (5/6):
The essay demonstrates a strong command of language and grammar. There are only minor grammatical errors, such as the use of "main" instead of "make" in the phrase "could main these coinciding events unrelated to each other." Additionally, there are a few instances of awkward phrasing that could be refined for smoother expression. Overall, language and grammar usage contribute positively to the clarity of the argument.
Vocabulary and word expression (5/6):
The vocabulary used is appropriate and effectively conveys the author's ideas. However, there are a few instances where word choices could be more precise or varied to enhance the overall richness of the essay. The expression of ideas is generally clear, and the author effectively conveys the critical analysis of the given argument.
Overall, this analytical writing assessment essay is well-structured and effectively critiques the provided argument. It demonstrates strong coherence, solid paragraph formation, and a good command of language and grammar. Minor improvements in sentence structure and vocabulary choice could enhance the overall quality of the essay.
wasario
Moderator:
