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 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.
26 Oct 2020, 23:24
Kudos
Bookmarks
ARGUMENT
The following appeared as part of an editorial in the Waymarsh city newspaper:
“Last year the parents of first graders in our school district expressed satisfaction with the reading skills their children developed but complained strongly about their children’s math skills. To remedy this serious problem and improve our district’s elementary education, everyone in the teacher-training program at Waymarsh University should be required to take more courses in mathematics.”
My AWA answer:
The argument claims that everyone in the teacher-training program at Waymarsh University should be required to take more courses in mathematics to improve the district's elementary education. It cites as a reason for this decision that the parents of first graders in Waymarsh city's school district complained strongly about their children's math skills last year. Stated in this way, the argument manipulates facts and conveys a distorted view of the situation, fails to mention several key factors that could be used to evaluate the argument, and relies on several assumptions with no clear evidence. Hence, the claim made in the argument is a weak one and is flawed.
First, the argument readily assumes that the parents of the first graders can accurately determine the ability of their children's math skills. It may be possible that the parents are unable to correctly judge the level of math skills and may be using incorrect metrics for the same. This assumption is flawed and further evidence is needed to bolster such a claim. The argument would have been strenghtened if the argument had clearly mentioned the metrics used by the parents or established a uniform criteria for evaluating math skills of first graders.
Second, the argument takes for granted that by taking more courses in mathematics, the teachers at the Waymarsh university's teacher training program will be able to impart this knowledge to the children successfully. Moreover, the arguemnent assumes that simply implementing a more rigorous training program at the Waymarsh University shall magically improve the teaching skills of all teachers in the district. Even if we assume this for the argument's sake, the impact of this course of action may cost the district much more than far cheaper and better alternatives. For example, a survey can be conducted to highlight the gap in learning techniques prefered by the students and those used by the teachers. This will certainly cost much less and may very well have a greater impact in improving the district's elementary education by identifying the weak areas in teaching math skills.
The argument leaves far too many wide gaps in its line of reasoning. Do parents use the correct metrics to judge their children's math skills? Will implementing the modified program have the intended impact? Are first graders a representative population of the children pursuing elementary education in the district? Without anwers to the above queestions, the claim made seems more as a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.
In a nutshell, the argument fails to further relevant evidence or facts that would have helped to evaluate the claim made. Without complete knowledge of all the relevant factors, an decision cannot be evaluated and validated satisfactorily. The line of reasoning offered by the arguemnt is flawed and takes into account several questionable assumptions. Hence, the argument is weak, unconvincing, and open to debate.
The following appeared as part of an editorial in the Waymarsh city newspaper:
“Last year the parents of first graders in our school district expressed satisfaction with the reading skills their children developed but complained strongly about their children’s math skills. To remedy this serious problem and improve our district’s elementary education, everyone in the teacher-training program at Waymarsh University should be required to take more courses in mathematics.”
My AWA answer:
The argument claims that everyone in the teacher-training program at Waymarsh University should be required to take more courses in mathematics to improve the district's elementary education. It cites as a reason for this decision that the parents of first graders in Waymarsh city's school district complained strongly about their children's math skills last year. Stated in this way, the argument manipulates facts and conveys a distorted view of the situation, fails to mention several key factors that could be used to evaluate the argument, and relies on several assumptions with no clear evidence. Hence, the claim made in the argument is a weak one and is flawed.
First, the argument readily assumes that the parents of the first graders can accurately determine the ability of their children's math skills. It may be possible that the parents are unable to correctly judge the level of math skills and may be using incorrect metrics for the same. This assumption is flawed and further evidence is needed to bolster such a claim. The argument would have been strenghtened if the argument had clearly mentioned the metrics used by the parents or established a uniform criteria for evaluating math skills of first graders.
Second, the argument takes for granted that by taking more courses in mathematics, the teachers at the Waymarsh university's teacher training program will be able to impart this knowledge to the children successfully. Moreover, the arguemnent assumes that simply implementing a more rigorous training program at the Waymarsh University shall magically improve the teaching skills of all teachers in the district. Even if we assume this for the argument's sake, the impact of this course of action may cost the district much more than far cheaper and better alternatives. For example, a survey can be conducted to highlight the gap in learning techniques prefered by the students and those used by the teachers. This will certainly cost much less and may very well have a greater impact in improving the district's elementary education by identifying the weak areas in teaching math skills.
The argument leaves far too many wide gaps in its line of reasoning. Do parents use the correct metrics to judge their children's math skills? Will implementing the modified program have the intended impact? Are first graders a representative population of the children pursuing elementary education in the district? Without anwers to the above queestions, the claim made seems more as a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.
In a nutshell, the argument fails to further relevant evidence or facts that would have helped to evaluate the claim made. Without complete knowledge of all the relevant factors, an decision cannot be evaluated and validated satisfactorily. The line of reasoning offered by the arguemnt is flawed and takes into account several questionable assumptions. Hence, the argument is weak, unconvincing, and open to debate.
