Awa Template

Issue:In general, do not take one side of the argument completely. A good rule of thumb is to argue your opinion at about 60 percent or 70 percent. I should emphasize this—even if you believe you are one hundred percent correct, you should still pretend that you are 60 or 70 percent correct.First Paragraph: IntroductionThe issue/belief/idea/opinion that ______________________________________ is an interesting/controversial one. This issue is increasingly important in this age of ___________________________. Many people believe _________________________, but these people overlook _________________________________________________. Furthermore, _____________________________________. In this essay, I will argue that __________________________________________________ _______________.

Second Paragraph: SupportThere are many good reasons for ____________________________. However, it cannot be ignored/overlooked that ___________________________. A classic example of this is ___________________________________________ . Try to add something interesting in this paragraph. Make sure you use a few complicated structures—try putting a subordinate clause first. Like this: While many type of professional promote the notion that _____________________________, I believe the opposite should be argued given the current situation/status/ of ___

P3- The another reason for my belief is that___________ for example.___________. ________________

ConclusionI have argued _______________________. This view will become increasingly dominant in the coming century given ________________________________. Many of these issues can never be resolved to everybody’s satisfaction, but in the long run, promoting ________________________________ will lead to the betterment of all involved. Finally, _____________________________ increased something like global cooperation, cultural understanding, blah, blah, blah can only result from this, resulting in ______________________________ for everybody.

Example: "It is unrealistic to expect individual nations to make, independently, the sacrifices necessary to conserve energy. International leadership and worldwide cooperation are essential if we expect to protect the world's energy resources for future generations."

Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.

The issue of whether to have a global consensus on energy conservation or not is a controversial one. On the one hand, achieving a global consensus is a cumbersome task because it involves sacrificing national interests to some extent. On the other hand expecting individual sacrifices on the part of nations will hamper their competitiveness in the international market. However in the final analysis of this issue I believe that a global consensus is essential in order to conserve the world's energy sources.

The chief reason for my view is that in today's world development is impossible without cooperation. If countries of Middle East region are rich in non-renewable energy resources like oil than countries like USA and France are rich in renewable energy resources like nuclear energy. Without cooperation among various countries sustained development is not possible. When countries like India fail to satisfy their energy needs on their own, they are dependent on oil and gas from Middle East. Further, when technologically starved nations like Bhutan and Myanmar want to harness their renewable energy sources, they are dependent on India for technical support.

Another reason for my opinion is that it is unfair to expect individual nations to make sacrifices necessary to conserve energy. If a country like US has the highest per capita energy consumption, then it is completely unfair to put the burden of reducing the energy consumption on US alone. The industrial development and the living standards in developed societies require higher energy consumption. On the other hand if this burden is placed on developing countries like India and China, they will lose their competitive edge.

Global cooperation in energy conservation will lead to a fair share in the pie for everyone . The developed countries like US can use their technological and scientific advancement to harness new energy sources and to develop more efficient techniques, and they can share the new advances with the developing world. This will led to energy conservation on a global level. Further, associations like G8 should take the initiative in this direction since they have the money and technological edge to make it possible.

In sum, I can concur that although it is not unfair to expect some sacrifice on the part of developed nations, International leadership and global cooperation are essential to conserve world's energy resources.

Argument:In the preceding statement, the author claims that....though his claim may well have merit, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument, based on several questionable premises and assumptions, and based solely on the evidence the author offers, we cannot accept his argument valid.

The primary issue with the argument lies in his unsubstantiated premises. The Author claims that…. .However the author does not offer any evidence (data/survey) that links the……. …… The argument’s premises, the basis for his argument, lack any legitimate evidentiary support and render his conclusion unacceptable.

In addition, the author makes several assumptions that remain unproven. The author assumes that……. Again, the author does not provide any evidence to substantiate the claim. It could be that…. Or that… . //// it is possible that….. ///even if…… // moreover…. By making several assumptions and failing to consider them , the author weaken his conclusion.

The editorial's argument is weakened by assumptions that do not provide any link to the conclusion. Even if….. moreover,…..

Though there are several key issues with the argument’s premises and assumptions, that is not to say that the argument is without base.//…….// The argument could have been strengthened if it mentioned the relevant facts and assumptions clearly. If it mentions…. Moreover, It will stand on better ground if it provide any data regarding……. Though there are several issues with the author’s reasoning at present, with research and analysis, he could improve his argument significantly. Conclusion:In sum, The author’s illogical argument is based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions……..if author truly hopes to change the readers’ mind on the issue, he would have to largely restructure the argument , fix the flaws, clearly explicate the assumptions and provide legitimate evidentiary support. Without this information the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate

Or

In sum, the editorial's argument is based on illogical assumptions and unsubstantiated premises. The editorial needs to fix the flaws in its reasoning and provide evidentiary support for us its argument. The editorial's current positioning, based on questionable premises and assumptions, renders its conclusion unacceptable.

Example: http://www.beatthegmat.com/argument-essay-template-if-anyone-wants-it-t38032.html AWA: Analysis of Argument Paragraph 1 I always start begin with a broad statement about the issue at hand. For instance in an argument essay about whether it was necessary to conserve energy, I would begin with:

Energy conservation has become a hot topic in the United States as of late. There are those who debate climate change and those who affirm it , those who assert that humans are depleting the world's natural resources, including fossil fuels, and those who believe that humans are barely making a dent in consuming the resources the earth has to offer.

I always continue by saying, "In the preceding statement, the author claims that (paraphrase of the author's argument)." This shows that I understand the author's argument. I continue with my disagreement (and, as has been often said, ALWAYS disagree with the author's reasoning, and I pretty much always used the same thesis statement, something like:

Though his claim may well have merit, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument, based on several questionable premises and assumptions , and based solely on the evidence the author offers, we cannot accept his argument as valid.

I can use that statement for pretty much any argument essay I encounter. The beginning shows that I see the issue as nuance, rather than black and white, and I recognize that though the author may have arrived at the correct answer, his reasoning is flawed.

Paragraph 2 For me, paragraph two always attacks the premises of the author's argument . I usually jot down a couple of premises on my board-- these are things that show up in the author's argument, usually without any evidence provided. So 99% of the time, I attack the lack of evidence that the author bases his premises on. I usually begin with some version of:

The primary issue with the author's reasoning lies in his unsubstantiated premises.

I like "primary" and "secondary" as transitional tools because they are more complex than "first" and "second". Throughout the first paragraph, I show flaws in the author's premises by pointing out his lack of evidentiary support (they pretty much always lack evidentiary support) and where they are open to holes or alternate explanations. I usually have two or three, but one would be fine if it was strong. I generally end with something like: The author's premises, the basis for his argument, lack any legitimate evidentiary support and render his conclusion unacceptable.

http://www.beatthegmat.com/argument-essay-template-if-anyone-wants-it-t38032.html

Paragraph 3 In the third paragraph, I always attack the assumptions - again, I jot down a couple assumptions on my notepad while reading the prompt.I usually begin with some variation of: In addition, the author makes several assumptions that remain unproven .

My assumption paragraph ends with something like:

The author weakens his argument by making assumptions and failing to provide explication of the links between X and Y he assumes exists. Paragraph 4 Paragraph 4 is where I talk about how the author could strengthen his argument

I usually begin this paragraph with something like:

While the author does have several key issues in his argument's premises and assumptions, that is not to say that the entire argument is without base.

Then I provide some concrete ways the author could strengthen his argument. The easiest way to do this is to give examples of what kind of evidence the author could provide, and discuss how he can fill the holes in his assumptions. I generally end with something like:

Though there are several issues with the author's reasoning at present, with research and clarification, he could improve his argument significantly.

Paragraph 5 This is my conclusion paragraph. I pretty much always conclude with the same sentence: In sum, the author's illogical argument is based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions that render his conclusion invalid.

I usually add a couple sentences of fluff in between and then I end with:

If the author truly hopes to change his readers' minds on the issue, he would have to largely restructure his argument, fix the flaws in his logic, clearly explicate his assumptions, and provide evidentiary support. Without these things, his poorly reasoned argument will likely convince few people.

...And that's pretty much it. So the cliff notes: P1- Intro with generic thesis statement that works for 99.9% of argument essays. P2 - Attack the premises of the argument. P3 - Attack the assumptions of the argument. P4 - Discuss what type of evidence or reasoning would strengthen the argument. P5 - Conclusion.++++++++++++++++++++++ Ex1: Argument: "The construction last year of a shopping mall in downtown Oak City was a mistake. Since the mall has opened, a number of local business have closed, the downtown area

suffers from an acute parking shortage, and arrests for crime and vagrancy have increased in the nearby Oak City Park. Elm City should pay attention to the example of Oak City mall and deny the application to build a shopping mall in Elm City."

Analysis: In this fast advancing world, world cities and businesses are growing at the speed of light and retail infrastructures in terms of big malls are expanding. Malls play a big role in modern life. There are those who support the presence of these big malls, as the malls offers 'all' in place and at a cheaper rater. There are others who are against the development and expansion of malls as they feel that the malls play a negative role in society. The newspaper editorial comes in the 'others' category. {Though the editorial may well have merits, its argument is weak as it is based on unsubstantiated premises and flawed assumptions. Based solely on the evidence the editorial offers, we need to reject the position that the editorial has taken. }

Though his claim may well have merits, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument, based on several questionable premises and assumptions, and based solely on the evidence the author offers, we cannot accept his argument as valid.

The primary issue with the editorial lies in its unsubstantiated premises. The editorial claims that the local businesses have closed due to the opening of the mall and that the downtown area suffers from acute parking shortage due to the presence of the mall. However, the editorial does not offer any evidence that links the presence of the mall with the closure of the businesses and the shortage of parking space in the downtown area. The editorial's premises, the basis for its argument, lack any legitimate evidentiary support and render its conclusion unacceptable.

In addition, the editorial makes several questionable assumptions. The editorial assumes that the crime and vagrancy have increased in the Oak City Park due to the presence of the mall. Again, no evidence has been provided to support the same. It is possible that the crime and vagrancy have increased due to decline in police force in the Oak City Park. The editorial's argument is weakened by assumptions that do not provide any link to the conclusion. Even if the current state of Oak City mall is responsible for the crime and parking shortage, it is no reason to block the application to build a new shopping mall in Elm City. Moreover, The conditions in one city cannot be linked with conditions in another city.

Though the editorial's reasoning and assumptions are weak and flawed, we cannot rule out that the argument is without base. The editorial could strengthen its conclusion if it backs up the premises and assumptions with (legitimate) evidentiary support. If we can prove that the mall does not have sufficient parking space to support the population visiting the mall and that the crime and vagrancy have increased only due to the presence of the mall and not due to any other factors then the conclusion will be strengthened. Also, the argument should provide evidence as to how the mall has affected the local businesses negatively instead of the current blank statement. Though there are several key issues with the editorial's argument, with research and analysis, the argument can be strengthened.

In sum, the editorial's argument is based on illogical assumptions and unsubstantiated premises. The editorial needs to fix the flaws in its reasoning and provide evidentiary support for us its argument. The editorial's current positioning,

based on questionable premises and assumptions, renders its conclusion unacceptable.

Ex2-The following appeared as part of a plan proposed by an executive of the Easy Credit Company to the president: “The Easy Credit Company would gain an advantage over competing credit card services if we were to donate a portion of the proceeds from the use of our cards to a well-known environmental organization in exchange for the use of its symbol or logo on our card. Since a recent poll shows that a large percentage of the public is concerned about environmental issues, this policy would attract new customers, increase use among existing customers, and enable us to charge interest rates that are higher than the lowest ones available.”

Environmental organizations are gaining a lot of popularity of late. Global Warming, Glacier melting and oil spills in oceans are deteriorating our environment. We need some organizations to work for the betterment of our environment. There are those who think that environmental organizations are here for looking after the environmental issues and then there are those who want to use the popularity of environmental organization as a revenue generating vehicle.

In the preceding statement, author claims that The Easy Credit Company would gain an advantage over competing credit card services if Easy Credit Company donates a portion of the proceeds from the use of its credit cards to well-known environmental organization in exchange for the use of environmental organization symbol or logo on Easy Credit Company’s Card. Though his claims may well have merits, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument, based on several questionable premises and assumptions, and based solely on evidence (Survey) the author offers, we cannot accept his argument as valid.

The primary issue with author’s reasoning lies in his unsubstantiated premises. The author makes an assumption that environmental organization will be willing to form collaboration with Easy Credit Company for an undisclosed sum. However , The author does not give any substantial evidence that environmental company would be willing to work with Easy Credit Card Company and author fails to consider that Environmental organization could already have such type of collaboration with a competitor company of Easy Credit Card Company. The author's premises, the basis for his argument, lack any legitimate evidentiary support and render his conclusion unacceptable.

In addition, The author makes several assumptions that remain unproven. The author considers a recent poll as the indicator of people’s concern about environmental issues. But author forgets that this survey might represent a small fraction of people who are aware of environmental concerns. Author make another assumption that seeing the environment organization’s logo on credit card will fetch new users and will motivate the existing users to spend more. But, again author fails to give any solid example to prove this assumption. So, the author weakens his argument by making assumptions and failing to provide the explications.

While the author does have several key issues in his argument’s premises and assumptions, that is not to say that entire argument is without base. With the increasing environmental awareness, the author is right in proposing that use of an

environmental organizations’ logo will bolster the company’s environment friendly image among the customers. If author can provide some evidence to prove that using environment organization’s logo will bring new customers then author’s argument can be verified. Though there are several key issues with the author’s reasoning at present, with research and clarification, he could improve his argument significantly.

In sum, the author’s illogical argument is based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions that render his conclusion invalid. If the author truly goes to change his reader’s minds on the issue, he would have to largely restructure his argument, fix the flaws in his logic, clearly explicate his assumptions, and provide evidentiary support. Without these things, his poorly reasoned argument will convince few people. or

~~~~~~ In sum, I feel that the argument would have been strengthened considerably if it mentioned {the extent of change in profits, the factors that contributed to this change and whether they were linked with the change in ownership of Croesus Co or not.} Without this information the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.__________________I think, Therefore I am

Ex-3.Argument

Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize profits.

Response

Experience has a great thing in itself as it makes you more efficient and tells what is the efficient method to do a particular Job, that’s why great organizations completely relies on experiences resources and sometimes they are asked to develop SOPs (Standard operating procedure), that further helps organization and make sure no one is trying to reinvent the wheel. As someone also said experience makes a man perfect, same applies for organizations also. Experienced organizations know how to do things better in time (or sometimes before time) that further reduces the cost specifically the operational cost.

In the preceding statement author claims that processing cost go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. Though his claim may have merit, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument based on several questionable premises and assumptions, and based solely on the evidence the author offers; we can not accept his argument as valid

The primary issue with the author’s reasoning lies in his unsubstantiated premises. The Author claims that in 1970, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell 50 cents

for five day service (that is 50/5=10 cent per day ) to 20 cents for one day service in 1984, however in reality if you have closer look in 1970 the cost was 10 cent per day and 20 cent in 1984 respectively. That means there is an increase of 10 cent per day in 14 years time span. Where is cost reduction? Secondary author didn’t mention the parameter on which cost is measured; May be reduction is just because of used material cost is getting down due to technology enhancement. For an example if a processing required rubber as a raw material, I am sure since 1970 to 1984 there would be significant difference in processing cost. It is not just because of that we learned how to do things better, instead Rubber cost itself is getting down as we learned more advanced and cheaper technology for Rubber manufacturing. The author premises, the basis of his argument, lack any legitimate evidentiary support and render his conclusion unacceptable.

In addition, the author makes several assumptions that remain unproven. First, the author doesn’t mention how the processing of food would get cheaper; as per current scenario people are getting more conscious towards health and food processing organization are struggling that how to provide more healthier food. And in-fact it requires advanced technology, henceforth higher the processing cost. For an example in US organic food is much more costlier due to its processing and this cost is getting up each subsequent year as almost every year food scientist/inventor are developing new technology that further cost little high comparatively. Secondary, the author didn’t provide how the food would quality would be maintained while trying to reduce the processing cost. The author weakens his argument by making assumptions and failing to provide explication of the links between processing of material and processing of food he assumes exists.

While the author does have several key issues in his argument’s premises and assumptions that is not to say that the entire argument is without base. Author could have made his argument more reasonable by providing the parameters on which he counted cost and food industry relationship with other manufacturing industries, moreover the explanation on how the food processing cost would go low would impacting quality, would be helpful Though there are several issues with author’s reasoning at present, with research and clarification, He could improve his argument significantly.

In sum, the author illogical argument is based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions that render his conclusion invalid . The lack of cost measurement parameters, food industry relationship with all other industries and how to maintain food quality while keep on reducing the processing cost on incremental basis. If the author truly hopes to change his readers mind on the issue, he would have to largely restructure his argument, fix the flaws in his logic, clearly explicate his assumptions and provide evidentiary support. Without these things, his poorly reasoned argument will convince few people.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--~~~~ I feel that the argument would have been strengthened considerably if it mentioned the extent of change in profits, the factors that contributed to this change and whether they were linked with the change in ownership of Croesus Co or not. Without this information the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.__________________I think, Therefore I am

or

I feel that the argument could have been considerably strengthened if it mentioned all the relevant facts. In order to assess the merit of a particular decision it is essential to have full knowledge of all the contributing factors . In this particular case, information regarding the overall performance, market conditions, competency of the CEO and the particular reasons for the poor performance of the Hardware division should have been mentioned in the argument. In absence of this specific information the argument is a mere allegation with no legs to stand on.__________________I think, Therefore I am

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AWA: Issue-

"It is unrealistic to expect individual nations to make, independently, the sacrifices necessary to conserve energy. International leadership and worldwide cooperation are essential if we expect to protect the world's energy resources for future generations."



The chief reason for my view is that in today's world development is impossible without cooperation. If countries of Middle East region are rich in non renewable energy resources like oil than countries like USA and France are rich in renewable energy resources like nuclear energy. Without cooperation among various countries sustained development is not possible. When countries like India fail to satisfy their energy needs on their own, they are dependent on oil and gas from Middle East. Further when technologically starved nations like Bhutan and Myanmar want to harness their renewable energy sources, they are dependent on India for technical support.


Global cooperation in energy conservation will lead to a fair share in the pie for everyone. The developed countries like US can use their technological and scientific

advancement to harness new energy sources and to develop more efficient techniques, and they can share the new advances with the developing world. This will led to energy conservation on a global level. Further, associations like G8 should take the initiative in this direction since they have the money and technological edge to make it possible.


++++++ When someone achieves greatness in any field—such as the arts, science, politics, or business—that person’s achievements are more important than any of his or her personal faults.

Student ResponseWhen individuals attain greatness, their achievements are more important than their personal faults. While historians should not whitewash the personal foibles of great individuals, the impact that these mortals have had in their fields should tower over any personality defects. To focus on the personal weaknesses of great individuals is to miss the importance of their achievements.The course of human history is decorated with individuals able to rise above their peers and reach the zenith in their fields. These individuals are often the subject of intense scrutiny from contemporaneous skeptics and later historians. But no one can lead an exemplary private life all the time; no human being is able to withstand such surveillance and historical scrutiny without personal faults coming to light. Great individuals are no exception. However, it is misguided to focus on their personal faults rather than their achievements. To do so is to miss the importance of their work, without which our culture would be worse off.For example, Abraham Lincoln was arguably one of the greatest Presidents the United States has ever had. He managed to bring the country through a substantial revolution and to end slavery despite powerful economic and social forces working against him day and night. However, Lincoln was not a saint. He was moody and prone to depressive funks that disrupted his family life and slowly eroded his marriage. These personal faults did not reduce his success as a President. While we do not have to ignore questions about whether he was a depressive, we also should not consider them an important part of his political heritage. In contrast, many people criticize Lincoln’s decision to suspend the right of habeas corpus. This (presumed) failing is not personal in nature, but relates directly to Lincoln’s work in his field. Criticisms of this sort are entirely relevant, whereas personal criticisms are not.Another example of a great individual dogged by criticism of his personal conduct is Albert Einstein. Einstein developed a number of the most important theories in modern physics, including an explanation of the photoelectric effect, an explanation of Brownian motion, special and general relativity, and Bose-Einstein quantum statistics. Each one of these theories would have been considered a

great life’s work for a scientist; for one man to contribute this much is remarkable. However, Einstein also had life-long problems with infidelity. The fact that he cheated on his wife is in no way relevant to his accomplishments in the field of physics, and indeed most references to Einstein properly ignore it. To focus attention on the faults of his personal life is to obscure the impact he made on history.Great individuals have personal faults, as all human beings do. Yet it is incorrect to assert that these faults detract from those individuals’ accomplishments. We are better able to appreciate the gravity of great accomplishments when we are not burying our heads in the sand, in search of personal failings.

Why This Essay Earns A Perfect 6.0 ScoreThe essay above earned a 6 because it takes all five steps necessary for a perfect score on the AWA.The thesis is extremely clear and concise. There is no ambiguity about how the author feels about the issue; she simply states her opinions with confidence and clarity. This section tests how well we can present a position on an issue effectively and persuasively—and this author passes with flying colors.The piece is also very well organized via the suggested intro-body-body-body-conclusion template. While she does deviate slightly from the suggested model by giving two examples rather than three, the first body paragraph strengthens the essay by lending heft and specificity to her position. Her two examples are very strong. President Lincoln is an ideal case study of a leader whose greatness should be not be obscured by his domestic doldrums (however interesting they may be to learn about). The same can be said with Einstein; his infidelities went to the grave with the women he may have wounded emotionally, while his work will live forever.Additionally, the conclusion is substantial and does an excellent job of summing up the essay without sounding too much like the introduction. It is easy to recycle many clauses from the intro in the conclusion, but this author does a great job of restating the thesis without sounding overly redundant. Lastly, this essay is extremely well-written. The grammar and syntax are practically flawless; the author sounds knowledgeable but not pedantic.Keep these steps in mind as you write your GMAT essay and you should have little trouble earning a score that is reflective of your overall b-school portfolio. +++++++++

Abhi78:++++

The following appeared in a memorandum issued by a large city’s council on the arts: “In a recent citywide poll, 15 percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our city’s art museums has increased by a similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports public television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with

severe cuts, we can expect that attendance at our city’s art museums will also start to decrease. Thus some of the city’s funds for supporting the arts should be reallocated to public television.” Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.

Television, a medium with a potentially far-reaching audience, provides an ideal platform for generating awareness and hence appreciation of the visual arts among the common public. Visual arts have always had a significant impact on the society, more so in the modern world. In the preceding statement, the report asserts that in view of imminent cuts in corporate funding for public television, a fall in attendance at the city's art museum is expected. The report recommends a reallocation of funds set aside for supporting the arts to be spent on public television to avoid the aforesaid situation. Though this claim may have some standing, on the basis of the offered premises which lack several unstated assumptions, the validity of the argument is called into question.

One of the issues with the argument lies in the unsubstantiated premises. It states the results of a citywide poll which mentions that fifteen percent more residents watch television programs about the visual arts compared to those interviewed in a similar poll five years ago. Whether the citywide poll is representative of the city population has not been mentioned in the argument provided. It could well be that the poll considers an insufficient representation of the actual city demographics. In addition, it mentions a possibility of severe cuts in corporate funding to the public television system. The credibility of the threat has not been explored and yet it has been inferred that there will be a drop in attendance at the art museums.

The more serious issue however is the number of unproven assumptions. The citywide poll mentions a certain percentage of residents who watch television programs about the visual arts and correlates this with a similar percentage rise in people visiting the city's art museums. These people who visit the museums may not be the same people who watch the programs on television. In fact the people who watch the programs on television may decide not to attend the museums as they watch programs offering the same content anyway. Also, the people visiting the museums may actually be visitors to the city rather than city residents who were respondents to the poll. Hence, attributing the programs on television to an increase in visitors to the art museum may be misleading. Another flaw in reasoning is that there is no mention as to whether the said programs are broadcast on public television. If this is not the case already, the reduced expenditure to public television will not affect the number of visitors to the museums assuming that the correlation mentioned previously does hold true.

Although the argument does have several gaps with regards to the premises and assumptions mentioned above, it is not entirely without base. Mentioning that the citywide poll is indeed representative of the city's general population and that the looming threat is credible goes some way towards strengthening the argument. Further, the several assumptions stated above can be accordingly addressed. A confirmation of the fact that a large proportion of the people who admitted to watching these programs on television in fact contributed to the rise in art museum viewership would further assist the argument. Finally if these programs are only broadcast on public television, then the argument appears a lot more logical and reasonable.

In light of these facts, the argument, based on unsupported premises without the assumptions provided, does not render a valid conclusion. In order to make the argument more compelling, the author needs to largely restructure the argument, fix the flaws in logic, explicate the assumptions and provide more evidentiary support.

I have used bits of myohmy's template btw.

This is a really solid essay. I would give it a 5. I have only a couple of suggestions. First, good job on structuring a clear organizational framework. However, you could benefit from using transitions to indicate your progress through the argument. This isn't a huge deal, but opening your topic sentences with words like, "First," "Primarily," "Furthermore," etc. can help guide the reader. You use those within the paragraphs, but they help make topic sentences read more smoothly. And second, your use of language is great, and you've achieved a good length here. Sometimes you're a little wordy, though. Your first two sentences don't serve any clear purpose, as the information that you present in them doesn't really have any bearing on the rest of the essay. I understand that you were trying to provide an introduction, but since those sentences didn't seem to address the validity of the argument itself, I initially worried that you were going to go off-topic and write about the issue instead of the argument. Anyway, these are small matters; overall your essay is strong, and I think making some small changes will add a little extra polish to your style._________________Andrea A. Grockit Tutor

3. “Corporations and other businesses should try to eliminate the many ranks and salary grades that classify employees according to their experience and expertise. A ‘flat’ organizational structure is more likely to encourage collegiality and cooperation among employees.”


Which is a better way to classify and reward employees of a business: a “flat” organizational structure or a hierarchical structure? The speaker prefers a “flat” structure in which distinctions between employees based on education or experience are not used as a basis for monetary rewards. I strongly disagree with the speaker’s view, for two reasons.

In the first place, the speaker’s preference for a “flat” structure is based upon the claim that cooperation and collegiality among employees is more likely under this system than under a hierarchical one. However, this claim ignores our everyday experience in human interaction. Disagreements among coworkers are inevitable. Without a clear authoritative figure to resolve them and to make final decisions, disputes are more likely to go unresolved and even worsen, therebyundermining cooperation, congeniality and, ultimately, productivity and profit .

In the second place, whether or not collegiality and cooperation are best fostered by a flat organizational structure is beside the point. My main reason for rejecting an organizational structure that does not distinguish workers in terms of their abilities or experience is that under such a system workers have little incentive to improve their skills, accomplish their work-related goals, or assume responsibility for the completion of their assigned tasks. In my experience, human motivation is such that without enticements such as money, status or recognition, few people would accomplish anything of value or assume responsibility

for any task. A flat system actually might provide a distinct disincentive for productivity and efficiency insofar as workers are not held accountable for the quality or quantity of their work. By ignoring human nature, then, a company may be harming itself by encouraging laziness and complacency.

In sum, the speaker’s opinion that a “flat” organizational structure is the best way to promote collegiality and cooperation among employees runs counter to thecommon sense about how people act in a work environment, and in any case provides a feeble rationale for the preference of one organizational structure overanother.

4. “Of all the manifestations* of power, restraint in the use of that power impresses people most.”

* manifestations: apparent signs or indicators

Explain what you think this quotation means and discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with it. Develop your position with reasons and/or specific examples drawn from history, current events, or your own experience, observations, or reading.

This quote means essentially that people admire powerful individuals who do not use their power to the utmost to achieve their goals but rather use only the minimum amount required to attain them. While this view is admirable in the abstract, the statement is inaccurate in that it fails to reflect how people actually behave.

The popularity of “revenge” movies aptly illustrates that many people are not impressed with individuals who use restraint when exercising their power. In these movies the protagonist is typically portrayed as having certain physical abilities that would enable him to easily defeat the various adversaries he encounters. In the initial confrontations with these individuals he typically refrains from using his abilities to defeat them. The audience, however, soon grows tired of this, and when the hero finally loses control and completely demolishes his opponent, they burst into applause. This homey example strongly suggests that many people are more impressed with the use of power than with the restraint of its use.

The Gulf War provides another example of a situation where restraint in the use of power was not widely acclaimed. When the allied forces under the command of General Schwartzkoff showed restraint by not annihilating the retreating Iraqi army, the general was widely criticized by the public for not using the force available to him to eliminate this potential enemy once and for all. This example shows once again that often people are not impressed by individuals who exhibit restraint in using their power.

In conclusion, the examples cited above clearly indicate that, contrary to the view expressed in the quote, many—if not most—people are more impressed with individuals who utilize their power to the utmost than with those who exercise restraint in the use of their power.

5. “All groups and organizations should function as teams in which everyone makes decisions and shares responsibilities and duties. Giving one person central authority and responsibility for a project or task is not an effective way to get work done.”

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the opinion expressed above? Support your views with reasons and/or specific examples drawn from your own work or school experiences, your observations, or your reading.

Which is a more productive method of performing a group task: allowing all group members to share in the decision making, duties and responsibilities, or appointing one member to make decisions, delegate duties and take responsibility? The speaker’s opinion is that the first method is always the best one. In my view, however, each of these alternatives is viable in certain circumstances, as illustrated by two very different examples.

A jury in a criminal trial is good example of a group in which shared decision-making, duties, and responsibility is the most appropriate and effective way to get the job done. Each member of the jury is on equal footing with the others. While one person is appointed to head the jury, his or her function is to act as facilitator, not as leader. To place ultimate authority and responsibility on the facilitator would essentially be to appoint a judge, and to thereby defeat the very purpose of the jury system.

By way of contrast, a trauma unit in a hospital is a case in which one individual should assume responsibility, delegate duties and make decisions. In trauma units, split-second decisions are inherently part of the daily routine, and it is generally easier for one person to make a quick decision than for a team to agree on how to proceed. One could argue that since decisions in trauma units are typically life-and-death ones, leaving these decisions to one person is too risky. However, this argument ignores the crucial point that only the most experienced individuals should be trusted with such a burden and with such power; leaving decisions to inexperienced group members can jeopardize a patient’s very life.

In conclusion, I agree that in some situations the best way to accomplish a task is through teamwork-sharing responsibility, duties and decision making. However, in other situations, especially those where quick decisions are necessary or where individual experience is critical, the most effective means is for one individual to serve as leader and assume ultimate responsibility for completing the job.

6. “There is only one definition of success — to be able to spend your life in your own way.”

To what extent do you agree or disagree with this definition of success? Support your position by using reasons and examples from your reading, your own experience, or your observation of others.

The speaker here defines success simply as the ability to choose how to spend one’s life. Under this definition, people who have the freedom to do whatever they want at any time they choose would presumably be the most successful ones, while those who have no such freedom would be the biggest failures. Viewing

the definition in this light reveals three serious problems with it.

The chief problem with this definition of success is that by the definition nearly all people would be regarded as failures. The reason for this is simple. Most people have extremely limited choices in what they can do and when they can do it. In other words, unrestricted freedom of choice is a luxury only a few people—perhaps a handful of tyrannical dictators and ultra-wealthy individuals—can afford.

Secondly, people who have a high degree of freedom in choosing their lifestyle often acquire it through means that would not earn them the accolade of being successful. For example, lottery winners or people who inherit a great deal of money may be able to spend their life in any way they choose, but few people would regard them as successful merely due to their financial fortune.

A third reason this definition of success is unacceptable is that it repudiates some of our basic intuitions about success. For most people, success is related to achievement. The more you achieve, the more successful you are; conversely, the less you achieve the less successful you are. Defining success in terms of freedom of choice ignores this intuition.

In sum, the proposed definition of success is far too limiting, and it belies our intuition about the concept. I think that most people would agree with me that success is better defined in terms of the attainment of goals.

Well people I got my official score report yesterday and I am happy to note that I got 6/6 in AWA. I feel that the AWA section is, in fact, one of the most crucial aspects of the test that we tend to ignore. The AWA section usually sets the pace for rest of the exam. True the AWA score is not going to affect one’s total score or percentile ranking but still it is one of the components and should be ignored at one’s peril. I have collected some basic reference material and techniques and I wish to share it with all the test takers so that we can have a definite resource on AWA as well.

The basics: There are 2 sections in the AWA part and both have to be attempted within half an hour each. The first one is Analysis of an Issue and the second one is Analysis of an Argument (I should say typing) task. The key to this section is presenting your ideas on the issue, and supporting them with examples that highlight them. All this has to be done keeping in view what the issue stated in the question. The organization of the response must be fluid and well conceived. It should be in a smooth rhythm with no jarring. There are a few basic requirements which one should meet to ensure a 6/6, first requirement is a rich vocabulary and the second one is following the GMAC grammar rules (those that are used for Sentence Correction). I have often come across advice stating that people should follow templates while attempting the AWA, and I feel that nothing could be more amiss. Remember that the readers are going to read about 10 essays at a go and unless your piece is unique, it will merit no attention. Secondly writing a response to an AWA topic is like skinning a pine-apple, the fruit should have no scales and at the same time it must not be skinned to the core. Likewise, each AWA topic has to be treated in a separate manner. There can be a specific algorithm. (I am writing about the one I followed)__________________I think, Therefore I am

Analysis of an Issue:

1. Read the topic and don’t be nervous while reading it.

2. Now decide your stance, remember it helps to have a middle stance. You can agree and disagree with the same thing at one go without making it obvious. Extreme stance must be avoided. Never use harsh words…” The argument is totally baseless etc..” such constructs give the impression that the writer is biased. Try using something more subtle such as.. “in absence of specific information, the argument fails to make an impact”.

TRY THIS:

INTRO << Basic Info about your stance >>

A:<<Idea 1>><<Example>>

B:<<Idea 2>><<Example>>

C:<<Idea 3>><<Example>>

Conclusion>>

3. Pen down all the Ideas that come in your mind. Spend no more than 3 minutes on this. Now rank these ideas in the order of their importance.

4. Find (and create) examples to support your ideas. Write them next to the ideas. Spend no more than 2 minutes.

5. Now start typing. You’ll have spent about 7 minutes on the foundations. Now Type the 5 paras giving 4 minutes per para. Spend the last 3 mins hunting for spelling mistakes…

Analysis of an Argument:

1. Read the argument carefully and try to find out the assumptions one which it is based.

2. Identify the shortcomings in the assumptions and write them down Spend 3 minutes on this.

3. Now order the shortcomings in the order of relevance and find examples that bring out these shortcomings. NEVER PRESENT WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT THE ARGUMENT. WRITE ABOUT WHAT IS MISSING IN IT.

4. Start typing and organize the response in paras. There should be at least 5 paras, with one for the intro and one for the conclusion.

5. Spend the last 5 minutes scanning for spellings.

__________________I think, Therefore I am

Samples:

1. The following appeared in a speech by a stock holder of Consolidated Industries at the Company’s annual stock holders’ meeting:

“In the computer hardware division last year, the profits fell significantly below projections, the product line decreased from 20 to only 5 Items, and expenditures for employee benefits increased by 15%. Nevertheless, the Consolidated’s Board of Directors has approved an annual salary of over one million dollars for our company’s chief executive officer. The present board members should be replaced because they are unconcerned about the increasing costs of employee benefits and salaries, in spite of the Company’s problems generating Income.”

Discuss how well reasoned….etc

Now write down the main ideas that come to your mind:

Is the falling cost and rising employee remuneration a sufficient reason to fire the Directors and the CEO.

Is the loss limited to the hardware division only? Are the other divisions performing well?

Was the production line reduced to make more profitable products? Were most of the products obsolete?

How was the total performance of the company? DO the employees deserve the raise?

What factors were responsible for the losses in the hardware division?

Etc etc…

Now start hammering away at the keyboard..

I do not agree with the stockholder's speech that the board of directors of the Consolidated Co. should be replaced because they are not concerned about the escalation in employee remuneration costs and falling profit lines. I feel that the argument put forth by the stockholder manipulates facts and conveys a distorted view of the situation; it fails to mention several key factors on basis of which the argument could be evaluated.

The argument draws its strength from data relating to the Company's computer hardware division and in a seemingly deceptive scope shift, it draws a generalization regarding the Company's performance as a whole. The argument fails to mention any thing about the performance of other divisions of the Consolidated Co. and in absence of data relating to the other divisions no conclusion regarding the Company's performance can be arrived at.

A CEO is responsible for the performance of the Company as a whole. The argument fails to present any explanation for the poor performance of the hard ware division that could be attributed to the CEO. It instead hurries to the judgment that the Board of Directors is incompetent and deserves to be fired. It is possible that the product line was reduced to 5 because rest of the products were generating losses or had become outdated, similarly the increase in the employee benefits might actually lead to higher levels of motivation and efficiency. In absence of specific reasons for the poor

performance of the hardware division, it is not possible to fix responsibility on a single individual.

Secondly, the argument is not backed with facts about the performance of the other divisions of the Consolidated Co. If the other divisions performed remarkably well and earned higher profits then the CEO probably deserves a raise and the Board of Directors is fully justified in its decision. There is no mention about the pay pack the CEO got last year, or about the general trend in the executive salaries. If the overall performance of Consolidated Co. is above expectations, giving greater employee benefits, synergizing the existing divisions, and rewarding the CEO are probably the right things for the Board to do.

Thirdly, the poor performance of the computer hardware division may be a result of unforeseen circumstances, or it may be because of strategy shifts required to adapt to the changing markets. If it is due to these external factors then it is best to measure the performance of the hardware division over a greater period of time to assess whether the changes instituted by the management do actually lead to higher profits later on.

I feel that the argument could have been considerably strengthened if it mentioned all the relevant facts. In order to assess the merit of a particular decision it is essential to have full knowledge of all the contributing factors. In this particular case, information regarding the overall performance, market conditions, competency of the CEO and the particular reasons for the poor performance of the Hardware division should have been mentioned in the argument. In absence of this specific information the argument is a mere allegation with no legs to stand on.__________________I think, Therefore I am

2. The following appeared in the editorial section of a local newspaper ..

“The profitability of Croesus Company, recently restored to private ownership, is a clear indication that businesses fare better in private hands than under public ownership”

Discuss how well reasoned….etc.

Again, Brainstorm…..

What can be the possible factors behind the increase in profits at Croesus Co?

What was the increase in profit? Was it due to seasonal variations? Was it due to any change initiated by the public management?

What were the internal factors that were modified by the pvt. Owners that led to higher profits?

What were the external factors? Can they be linked to the pvt. Owners or management?

What are the advantages of a public enterprise Over a pvt. Enterprise?

Conclude..

Start typing..

I don't agree with the argument that restoring Croesus Co. to private ownership has led to an increase in its profitability because the argument fails to give any specific examples to prove that the private ownership led to any change in the way Croesus Co. operates, the sort of market it caters to, the general conditions prevalent in the economy at that time and other profit related operational parameters. In absence of specific information in this regard the argument has no legs to stand on. In the following paragraphs I shall try to bring out what I think to be the shortcomings in the argument and justify my stance.

Firstly, there is no data relating to the profitability of the Croesus Co, apart from the statement that 'it increased'. This does not specify the quantum of the increase. In case it is a minor increase it may have taken place due to the seasonal variations in the economic cycles, In case it is a major increase it may have taken place due to measures initiated while Croesus Co. was still in public hands. I feel that the argument would have been strengthened if it mentioned the internal or external factors responsible for change in the profitability of Croesus Co. and the relation of this change to the private ownership.

As far as internal factors are concerned, the argument fails to mentions whether any new strategy was initiated by the Private Owners to increase the sales, reduce the costs or in any way try to improve the profitability of the enterprise. There is no mention of the direct and overhead costs, contributions by factor inputs and whether these have changed as a result of change in the ownership. If the company operates in the same way as it did before the ownership changed and there is no change in any internal operational parameter, then the increase in profitability cannot be attributed to the change in ownership.

Speaking of the external factors, the argument fails to mention any change in the external factors that might have been responsible for the increase in profitability and whether such change was in any way related to the change in ownership. If such changes are beyond the control of the new owners and they have had a favorable effect on the profitability of the company, then it is wrong to attribute the increase in profitability to the change in ownership. There can be several changes such as an unforeseen increase in demand for the products, windfall profits resulting from the investments made by the concern et c. which may have been actually responsible for the increase in the profits.

The public ownership of any enterprise does not reduce the profitability of any enterprise unless inclement circumstances that are beyond the control of the ownership and the management lead to such a situation. My contention is that even public enterprises are accountable, and more so as compared to private enterprises. If a public enterprise goes into the red it is not a few individuals who suffer, rather the entire community incurs a loss. This essentially means that public ownership of any enterprise does not, in any way, lessen its profitability or change its business objectives.

I feel that the argument would have been strengthened considerably if it mentioned the extent of change in profits, the factors that contributed to this change and whether they were linked with the change in ownership of Croesus Co or not. Without this information the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate. __________________I think, Therefore I am

3. “Of all the manifestations of power, restraint in the use of that power impresses people the most.”

Explain what you think this quotation means and discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with it. Develop your position with reasons and/or specific examples drawn from history, current affairs, or your experience, observation or reading….

Seems to be a toughie but it isn’t. Start thinking and listing thoughts:

Associate restraint with power…Does restraint mean the same thing as being powerful?

Having power and not using it for the greater good.. is it justified??

Restraint is useless unless the enemy stops doing wrong things? Ex…Nazism and Fascism..

Restraint does not serve a useful purpose unless the antagonist appreciates and understands one’s powers. Ex. Cold War.

Conclude.. <I put Edmund Burke because I saw his bio on the History Channel ;)) >>

Type away..

I think that this quotation implies that restraint in use of power is the greatest attribute of a powerful person. The quotation conveys the meaning that among the diverse uses power can be put to the best use possible is restraint in the exercise of power. I disagree with what the statement says, because the statement ignores the possibility of misinterpretation of restraint. There are several examples in history which bring out this fact. In the following paragraphs I shall strengthen my stance with appropriate examples and bring out, what I feel, to be shortcomings in the passage.

The greatest weakness of the quotation is that it does not take into account whether restraint on their part will prevent the enemy/competitor from committing atrocities or using unfair means. In case this is not so it is quite possible that the enemy without knowing the full potential of the given person start hostile action assuming that restraint on part of that person is a sign of his weakness.

The Allied countries did the same mistake during World War II, when Germany invaded Czechoslovakia. Instead of taking any concrete action and thinking that the restraint on their part will discourage the Nazis, they maintained silence over the issue. This was the single most important factor that fuelled the Nazi Expansion and led to a war so devastating that it took lives of millions of people.

Another shortcoming of the quotation is that restraint is not an effective deterrent. In order to dissuade a competitor from undertaking any activity detrimental to a given concern, it is necessary that the competitor must have a clear assessment of what the concern can do in such a scenario, in absence of this it is certain that either unknowingly or erringly the antagonist may commit certain actions which will prove harmful to all the parties concerned.

A clear example would be the cold war. During the cold war, both the USA and the USSR demonstrated nuclear capabilities. This led to the development of the idea of mutually assured destruction in event of a nuclear war which prevented the USA and USSR from entering into open war. This may seem to support the quotation but there is a catch...both the countries had a clear understanding of each-others capabilities.

Restraint is indeed a good attribute for a powerful person/organization but only as long as restraint is understood in that way by its enemies. The quotation is qualified by how the competitors/enemies understand and appreciate restraint on part of a person/organization. Perhaps the most emphatic statement against restraint was made by Edmund Burke- "The only thing required for evil to progress, is for good men to do nothing". I feel that the quotation would have been considerably strengthened if it mentioned that a) the enemy does not take restraint as a sign of cowardice, b) each party involved has full knowledge of each-others capabilities and c) each part has a clear understanding of what would occur in case of war/competition.

Well this is a small effort on my part. I hope it helps. Do let me know if something(s) is(are) amiss. And please contribute to this discussion…__________________I think, Therefore I am

Some more samples…

4. The following appeared as part of annual report sent to the stockholders by Olympic Foods. “Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-Inch print fell from 50cents for five days service in 1970 to 20 cents for one day service in 1984. The same principle applies to processing of food. And since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its twenty-fifth birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize profits.” Discuss how well reasoned do 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 counter-examples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.

I intend to take this problem using taking the middle stance. So here goes..

Experience leads to efficiency and higher output. The argument seems to be going the right way…

Can experience in food processing industry have the same applications as in color printing industry?

Have the operational parameters of the food processing industry remained the same? Is the production process basically the same as it was years ago?

What could the argument state in addition to what has already been put forth?

Type away..

The argument states that the costs of processing fall over time as the organization gains more experience in production. This experience translates into higher efficiency and lower costs. I fully agree with this part of the argument. As an organization continues production over a period of time, it is able to identify and correct any short comings in the production process. This leads to higher efficiency and greater output per factor

used in production. This helps the organization to lower production costs. In a competitive market this would provide the organization with the option of lowering product prices and gaining market share as a result of increased demand. The example of reduction in the cost and processing times of color prints is partly suitable for supporting the above argument. It is true that with an increase in the experience of the producer there will be an increase in efficiency and reduction in costs and times involved in production. It is mentioned that the fall in costs and time for color printing is over a period of 14 years. With such a large reference period it is vital to mention the role played by factors other than experience and assess the net real advantage derived from experience. The argument fails to do this and this seriously, weakens an otherwise strong example. The argument further states that the same principle is applicable in the food processing industry. This statement would have relevance only if there is no change in the operational parameters of the production process. This principle is applicable to all industries provided the production process is not significantly altered by changes in technology, changes in prices of inputs, conformity to regulations etc. In case there is a major change in the production process, past experience becomes less relevant. I feel that the argument is logical; however the data of supporting examples is rather inadequate. The argument could have been strengthened if the examples given were more specific in nature and not based on generalization. For example, if it was mentioned that by the virtue of experience gained from its long operational history, the photo printing industry was able to increase worker productivity and resource utilizations by more efficient production techniques resulting in lower production costs, the argument would have been considerably strengthened. On the whole the argument is good and gives an optimistic view as far as profit potential and operational efficiency of Olympic Foods are concerned.


5.The following appeared as part of a memorandum from the loan department of the Frostbite National Bank.

"We should not approve the business loan application of the local group that wants to open a franchise outlet for the Kool Kone chain of ice cream parlors. Frostbite is known for its cold winters, and cold weather can mean slow ice cream sales. For example, even though Frostbite is a town of 10,000 people, it has only one ice cream spot--the Frigid Cow. Despite the lack of competition, the Frigid Cow's net revenues fell by 10 percent last winter."

I do not completely agree with the argument put forth by the loan department of the Frostbite National Bank. The argument is has a persuasive tenor and does provides some factual evidence, however it lacks specific information relating to the ice-cream business in Frostbite. The argument states that since Frigid Cow's revenues fell by 10% during the last winter, any business enterprise with plans to set up an Ice Cream business in Frostbite will undoubtedly fail in the endeavor. This is a generalization and

it cannot be applied to all cases. In the following paragraphs I will bring out the shortcomings of this argument and explain how it could have been strengthened.

First of all, the argument makes a wrong assumption that the performance of a particular business is indicative of the performance of all business undertakings in that industry. There is no mention that Frigid Cow sustained losses last winter. A bank has to focus on the ability of a business to repay the loan and the interest thereon, as long as a business is capable of doing that and not running into losses there is no rationale to assume that the business will be unable to meet its loan-related obligations.

The argument mentions that the revenues of Frigid Cow fell during the winter season, which is expressedly stated to be very severe in Frostbite. It is common sense that the sales of an ice-cream business will fall during the winter season, especially when the climatic conditions are inclement to the consumption of Ice cream. The argument would have been strengthened if it mentioned the length of the winter season , the sales of Ice Cream during these months and the related cash inflows and outflows involved.

Last but not the least the argument fails to consider the sales of Frigid Cow during the summer months, if the concern is able to generate sufficient revenue during the summer months, lower sales during winters will not adversely affect the financial health of the concern. Moreover it is possible that the concern can lower its level of production during the lean season and calibrate it with the seasonal demand. This will reduce extra expenditure and improve the profitability of the concern.

To conclude, I will say that the argument would have been considerably strengthened if it mentioned in explicit terms the revenues of Frigid Cow during the summers, its financial health and whether it ever defaulted on loan payments. Secondly the argument also needs to establish a strong relation between the performance of frigid cow and the anticipated performance of the Kool Kone group. It is possible that competition may prove to be healthy and improve financial prospects of both the groups. In absence of such information the argument remains unconvincing.__________________I think, Therefore I am

Some more topics:

"Without new ideas, any society will stagnate. New ideas can only be introduced in a society that permits freedom of expression. Therefore, if a society is to thrive, all limits on freedom of expression should be eliminated." 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.

This is one of the more typical ones.

1. The argument seems to be well reasoned a few lines about that.

2. New Ideas are good for the society but they must be regulated

3. Freedom of expression, what is good and what is bad..

4. Argument would have been strengthened if it put limits on freedom of expression in as far as protecting public morality and civic sense is concerned.

5. The argument was basically correct, in line with modern thought but needs some tweaks.

I feel that the argument is persuasive and is based on a sound reasoning. The argument is able to give convincing reasons in support of freedom of expression . It successfully links the influx of new ideas in a society with its future development . However it fails to consider the possible misuse of the freedom of expression. In the following paragraphs I shall try to bring out the strengths and the shortcomings of the argument and suggest the alternatives that can reasonably strengthen it.

New Ideas lead to development of a well-informed and objective society that is not influenced by useless dogmas and that does not subscribe to malefic practices. Change is inevitable in this world. All societies have to cope with changes and adapt to them. It is possible to do so only if there is an influx of new ideas. However the ideas need to be regulated to ensure that there is no negative impact on the society. A positive change is always welcome; a negative change must always be avoided.

Freedom of expression guarantees that each and every member of the society has a say. It ensures that people are able to express themselves the way they like to. This makes it possible for the society to take collective decisions and to discuss and debate various the various issues it faces. At the same time it is necessary that the freedom of expression does not lead to radicalism or extremist behavior of any kind. It was the freedom of expression that led to the development of the United Sates as we know it today and it was the same freedom of expression that was responsible for the rise of Nazism in Germany.

I feel that the argument would have been considerably strengthened if it mentioned that the freedom of expression must not come in the way of maintaining national security and public morality. Any thought or idea that seeks to lower the bar of civil standards in a society will have negative repercussions in the future and it must be avoided; at the same time the voice of the people must not be stifled and everyone should be an active participant in the societal affairs.

Modern age is characterized by fast access to information and news. In today's world people are more aware of their rights and responsibilities as compared to their ancestors. People can differentiate between good and bad and everyone appreciates the freedom to express oneself without any incumbent. In context of such a scenario the argument is convincing and well reasoned . However it could have been strengthened if it considered the possible misuses of the freedom of expression and accounted for them accordingly.


"Some have argued that the salaries of corporate executives should be linked to those of their lowest-paid employees. This, they argue, will improve relations between management and workers, reducing costly labor disputes and increasing worker productivity. What these people overlook, however, is that these high salaries are necessary to attract the best managers, the individuals whose decisions have the greatest impact on the overall well-being of the company."

Which do you find more compelling, the contention that worker and executive salaries should be linked, or the response to it ? Support your position with reasons and examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.

Yet another contentious Issue.

Para 1: I feel that the response is more compelling (All of us want to be rich don't we?)

Para 2: Quality workforce is important, but there is a skill shortage, so high salaries.

Para 3: Remuneration should be commensurate with the authority and responsibility attached to the job.

Para 4: Relations between salaries and worker-management relations are not founded on scientific proof.

Para 5: The number of workers and executives is not the same in any concern. Therefore difference is salaries are evident.

Para 6: Argument fails to justify itself.

I feel that the response to the contention is far more compelling than the argument itself. Salaries of the corporate executives cannot be compared to those of the lowest-paid workers. In the existing global business scenario, no business pays an employee more than what it expects to earn by hiring that employee. It is wrong to contend that the relations between the management and workers can be improved by lower pay packs for the executives. There are several reasons for this that I will put forth in the following paragraphs.

In today's competitive scenario, it is of utmost importance that the companies are able to employ the best possible workers . This helps in maintaining a quality work force which can contribute in a greater way to the total production and profitability. The same is true for executives. It is a known fact that there are not many qualified persons available in the global job markets to meet the ever increasing demand for executives. In this case it becomes essential that the companies are able to attract the best talent. This translates into higher salaries for the executives.

Secondly, if we analyze the authority and responsibility attached with an executive level job, it becomes clear that the decisions taken at the executive level will have a far greater impact on the future course of the company as compared to those taken at the worker level. It is therefore essential that the remuneration for such jobs be significantly higher than that for worker level jobs. This trend is reflected in the current practices of all major companies, employees at executive positions command hefty pay packs, besides several perks and facilities.

Thirdly, the relations between management and the workers are not solely determined by the salaries at their respective levels. Several other factors such as management

policies, working conditions and union politics affect worker-management relation in a more significant way. The contention that lower executive salaries will boost worker-management relations is akin to saying that the President of the United States should travel by economy class to improve the relations between the Government and its employees.

Fourthly, there is a significant difference between the number of workers and the number of executives employed by a concern. The concern cannot pay the same salary to the workers and the executives because if the salaries are high, then the concern will soon find itself the red and if the salaries are low all talented executives will leave the concern for more lucrative positions in other concerns. Moreover everyone appreciates the fact that if a given job position is relatively crucial to the well being of the concern as a whole and has a greater level of responsibility attached to it, it is only fair that it commands a higher salary.

To conclude, I would say that the contention that salaries of the executives should be linked to their lowest-paid employees is founded on unsustainable premises. It ignores the universal norm that pay should be linked to the work done. If an executive gets a higher salary, that is because of the extra earnings the concern is able to make by hiring that executive and not because the fact that the concern differentiates between its employees._________________I think, Therefore I am

QUERIES:…..

Thanks Abhishek for the excellent approach to AWA..

I have one query in the AA essay No.2 you have mentioned

The public ownership of any enterprise does not reduce the profitability of any enterprise unless inclement circumstances that are beyond the control of the ownership and the management lead to such a situation. My contention is that even public enterprises are accountable, and more so as compared to private enterprises. If a public enterprise goes into the red it is not a few individuals who suffer, rather the entire community incurs a loss. This essentially means that public ownership of any enterprise does not, in any way, lessen its profitability or change its business objectives.

And earlier you have mentioned 3. NEVER PRESENT WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT THE ARGUMENT. WRITE ABOUT WHAT IS MISSING IN IT.

Doesnt the above para present a personal opinion to the argument?

Or this a thin line which we need to tread carefully?

__________________LIVE FREE OR DIE...

The profitability of Croesus Company, recently restored to private ownership, is a clear indication that businesses fare better in private hands than under public ownership”

Discuss how well reasoned….etc.

Now the penultimate para in my response was based on the question: What are the advantages of a public enterprise Over a pvt. Enterprise? (( Dont think about Indian psu's :))

The obvious advantage is accountability, in order to bring that out it was essential to portray public enterprise as such. And as you mention, it is indeed a thin line that has to be tread while

framing the response. Moreover the guidelines are general and not specific and can be broadly interpreted.__________________I think, Therefore I am

Can, anyone please expand on this AWA Issue - what kind of examples would go in it --

3.With the increasing emphasis on a global economy and international cooperation, people need to understand that their role as citizens of the world is more important than their role as citizens of a particular country.

If you have an economics background then you can start with:

Creating a level playing field for all countries, removing barriers and rationalizing exchange rates... ONCE all this is done ONLY then people can consider things from a global perspective and not a national one....

WHY.. obviously because of economic limitations and variations in exchange rates richer countries will be able to sponge money from the poorer ones resulting in lower standard of living, lesser incomes and greater unemployment in the country at the recieving end..

COUNTER BY:

If people consider things from the Global viewpoint then they will focus on the strengths of their economies..(LIKE services in India and Manufacturing in China) and over a period of time the trade barriers will go away...but only if the governments in other (export markets) countries don't resort to protectionism…Hope this helps..

Hello Abhishek,

I read your notes about AWA and found them very useful. I wrote my first AWA and don't know where I stand. Do you mind giving me your inputs. On scale of 6, how many marks do you think I'll get on paragraph like this.

Thanks

Issue is:

"It is unrealistic to expect individual nations to make, independently, the sacrifices necessary to conserve energy. International leadership and worldwide cooperation are essential if we expect to protect the world's energy resources for future generations".

Conserving energy resources for future generations is an increasingly growing concern. Energy resources are distributed unevenly across the globe. I believe that an International leadership and worldwide cooperation are essential in order to protect the world's energy resources for future generations.

There are several different types of natural resources, most of them are perishable. Some countries have abundant petrol and natural resources while others have abundant mineral resources. All these resources are required for any countries growth. Countries trade these resources with each other on regular basis to fulfill their needs. Different resources require different kind of terrains for their growth, for instance Petroleum requires desert climate. Middle Easter countries like Saudi Arabia has abundant petroleum resources; however they do not have conducive environment for most of the other resources, which they end up importing from other countries. Countries like Japan , who are technologically advanced, do not have much natural resources; however they have invented several technologies such as hybrid car, which help them improve the efficiency of automobiles and thus conserve petroleum.

If the conservation were to be done at an individual nation level, then almost every nation will have to sacrifice on some or the other things. For instance, Japan can continue to leverage it's innovation in areas where it has found a substitute for petroleum, but compromise on certain aspects where they still require petroleum. Similarly Saudi Arabia can continue to lavishly use petroleum but then will have to compromise on other mineral intensive services/products. Thus instead of dealing with this issue at individual nation level, if we can take a global approach, it can be more effective. For instance Japan can share

their hybrid car technology with Saudi Arabia, which in turn can help save tons of petroleum saving for our future generations.

Now that we understand the effective way of saving energy resources globally, let's discuss how we can achieve it. There are several worldwide organizations such as WHO (World Health Organization), UN (United Nations) etc, which are effectively dealing with different issues globally. WHO is a successful organization that has been dealing with global health issues effectively. They bring together representatives from different countries, which bring not only different perspectives but different expertise. Being a global organization, they know take the learning experience from one part of the world and apply it to the other.

As you noticed that there are ways of conserving resources at individual country level, clearly there are several advantages of doing it more effectively at the global level.

Hi Nicktnd,

Your essay is very good, I think it will get you a 6/6.. but a word of advise.

Try to write an essay as if you are selling an Idea, if you have taken a stance then for each para (except opening and conclusion) try to:-

Quote the fact/ argument that strengthens you stance, follow it up with reasoning and examples and if time exists demolish the oppposite premise.....then you are selling an Idea, modelled in the form of an essay. This is what the GMAT dudes are looking for. Garb all negative sentences in a lucid structure, even as the meanest of CEOs dress in Gucci suits. :))

Regards,

Abhishek


Question Stem: It is more important to use your own judgment than to follow the advice of experts.

It is important to both use your own judgment and to listen to experts. In my experience experts can be helpful when you need expert advice such as a medical opinion, or financial advice. But it is also

important to do what you think is right.(While it is a good idea to give a balanced introduction, where you introduce both sides, after reading your

intro, I'm not sure what your position is. You should be very clear in your intro about what your central argument is.)

In my experience as a jewelry salesperson, I have found that people who are called experts do not always know what they are talking about. So called experts often want to sell something, so their advice isn't

always the best for the consumer. In one jewelry store I used to work in they wanted us to give advice to the customers that wasn't totally accurate, or only tell them certain things if they asked. We would have to

tell them that jewelry that wasn't that well made was actually really well made.(Good job using an example, and this is a relevant one. But, it is important that when you use examples that you are very clear about what point they are illustrating. What is the underlying argument beneath the example? Why is this a particularly good example? After reading your paragraph, I think your main point is that it is important to make your own choices, because people who are experts may not have our best interest at heart. You'd want to explicitly say something like this, ideally in your first sentence

in this paragraph.)

People that are called experts are not always really that expert. (I like how you state your underlying argument in your first sentence. This makes it very clear what you will go on to discuss.) Who gets to decide if they are experts? We don't know if the advice of experts is really that good. Will an "expert"

really have good advice? How do we know if it is good advice? (If you use questions it is important to answer them yourself, or to state why these questions are proving

the point you wish to make. Also, this argument is very similar to the argument in your first body paragraph. Ideally arguments will be a bit ! more different. You'd also want to be sure to connect the

argument in this paragraph with your overarching argument for your whole essay. It would also be a good idea to be a bit more specific. Perhaps an example would strengthen your argument.)

Overall, experts are not always that expert. We don't know if they are qualified to give their opinions and don't know if we should follow them. It is also complicated because experts sometimes want to sell you

something, and don't always give you the best advice. (This conclusion could be a bit more focused on the essay topic. In this paragraph you stated what your

arguments were, but didn't' discuss why they support your overall conclusion. And you'd want to be more explicit about what your overall argument is.)

Scoring Report: Structure: 4 I like how you used a 5 paragraph structure with an intro, 2 body paragraphs and a

conclusion. I would like to see your body paragraphs stating your underlying argument in your first sentence.

Content: 3 You have the beginnings of some strong arguments. But the organization could be better. I would suggest outlining before you begin, where you think of 2 or 3 arguments for your overall essay. This

should help you formulate stronger examples.

Style: 4 A bit vague at times.

Overall Score: 3 1/2

This is a good start. Some more practice at developing more fully developing your arguments should help you improve future scores!

So the cliff notes: argument: Summary:

...And that's pretty much it. So the cliff notes: P1- Intro with generic thesis statement that works for 99.9% of argument essays. P2 - Attack the premises of the argument. P3 - Attack the assumptions of the argument. P4 - Discuss what type of evidence or reasoning would strengthen the argument. P5 - Conclusion.+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Ex1: Argument: "The construction last year of a shopping mall in downtown Oak City was a mistake. Since the mall has opened, a number of local business have closed, the downtown area suffers from an acute parking shortage, and arrests for crime and vagrancy have increased in the nearby Oak City Park. Elm City should pay attention to the example of Oak City mall and deny the application to build a shopping mall in Elm City."

Analysis: In this fast advancing world, world cities and businesses are growing at the speed of light and retail infrastructures in

terms of big malls are expanding. Malls play a big role in modern life. There are those who support the

presence of these big malls, as the malls offers 'all' in place and at a cheaper rater. There are others who are against the development and expansion of malls as they feel that the malls play a negative role in society. The newspaper editorial comes in the 'others' category. _______{Though the editorial may well have merits, its argument is weak as it is based on unsubstantiated premises and flawed assumptions. Based solely on the evidence the editorial offers, we need to reject the position that the editorial has taken. }

________{Though his claim may well have merits, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument, based on several questionable premises and assumptions, and based solely on the evidence the author offers, we cannot accept his argument as valid.}

___Though editorial may well have merits, its argument is weak as it is based on the unsubstantiated premises and assumptions. Based solely on the evidence the editorial offers, we need to reject the position the editorial has taken.

____Though the editorial may well have merit, its argument is weak as it is based on unsubstantiated premises and assumptions. Based solely on the evidence the editorial offer, we need to reject the position editorial has taken.

___Though the editorial may well have merit, its argument is weak as it is based on the unsubstantiated premises and assumptions. Based solely on the evidence the editorial offers, we need ti reject the position the editorial has taken.

____Though his claim may well have merits, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument, based on several questionable premises and assumptions, and based solely on the evidence author offers, we cannot accept his argument valid.

_____Though his claim may well have merits, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument, based on several questionable premises and assumptions, and based solely on the evidence author offers we can not accept his position valid.

The primary issue with the editorial lies in its unsubstantiated premises. The editorial claims that the local businesses have closed due to the opening of the mall and that the downtown area suffers

from acute parking shortage due to the presence of the mall. However, the editorial does not offer any evidence which links the presence of the mall with the closure of the businesses and the shortage of parking

space in the downtown area. The editorial's premises, the basis for its argument, lack any legitimate evidentiary support and render its conclusion unacceptable.

In addition, the editorial makes several questionable assumptions. The editorial assumes that the crime and vagrancy have increased in the Oak City Park due to the presence of the mall. __~~~~{Again, no evidence has been provided to support the same.} It is possible that the crime and vagrancy have increased due to decline in police force in the Oak City Park. The editorial's argument is weakened by assumptions that do not provide any link to the conclusion. Even if the current state of Oak City mall is responsible for the crime and parking shortage, it is no reason to block the application to build a new shopping mall in Elm City. The conditions in one city cannot be linked with conditions in another city.

___~~~~{ However , The author does not give any substantial evidence support the same} It is possible that________

Though the editorial's reasoning and assumptions are weak and flawed, we cannot rule out that the argument is without base. The editorial could strengthen its conclusion if it backs up the premises and assumptions with (legitimate) evidentiary support. If we can prove that the mall does not have sufficient parking space to support the population visiting the mall and that the crime and vagrancy have increased only due to the presence of the mall and not due to any other factors then the conclusion will be strengthened. Also, the argument should provide evidence as to how the mall has affected the local businesses negatively instead of the current blank statement. Though there are several issues with the editorial's argument, with research and analysis, the argument can be strengthened.

~~~~~ [In sum, the editorial's argument is based on illogical assumptions and

unsubstantiated premises. The editorial needs to fix the flaws in its reasoning and provide evidentiary support for us its argument. The editorial's current positioning, based on questionable premises and assumptions, renders its conclusion unacceptable.]

Or

~~~~~~[In sum, I feel that the argument would have been strengthened considerably if it mentioned {the extent of change in profits, the factors that contributed to this change and whether they were linked with the change in ownership of Croesus Co or not.} Without this information the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.__________________]I think, Therefore I am

Ex2-The following appeared as part of a plan proposed by an executive of the Easy Credit Company to the president: “The Easy Credit Company would gain an advantage over competing credit card services if we were to donate a portion of the proceeds from the use of our cards to a well-known environmental organization in exchange for the use of its symbol or logo on our card. Since a recent poll shows that a large percentage of the public is concerned about environmental issues, this policy would attract new customers, increase use among existing customers, and enable us to charge interest rates that are higher than the lowest ones available.”

Environmental organizations are gaining a lot of popularity of late. Global Warming, Glacier melting and oil spills in oceans are deteriorating our environment. We need some organizations to work for the betterment of our environment. There are those who think that environmental organizations are here for looking after the environmental issues and then there are those who want to use the popularity of environmental organization as a revenue generating vehicle.

In the preceding statement, the author claims that The Easy Credit Company would gain an advantage over competing credit card services if Easy Credit Company donates a portion of the proceeds from the use of its credit cards to well-known environmental organization in exchange for the use of environmental organization symbol or logo on Easy Credit Company’s Card. Though his claims may well have merits, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument, based on several questionable premises and assumptions, and based solely on evidence (Survey) the author offers, we cannot accept his argument as valid.

The primary issue with author’s reasoning lies in his unsubstantiated premises. The author makes an assumption that environmental organization will be willing to form collaboration with Easy Credit Company for an undisclosed sum. However , The author does not give any substantial evidence that environmental company would be willing to work with Easy Credit Card Company and author fails to consider that Environmental organization could already have such type of collaboration with a competitor company of Easy Credit Card Company. The author's premises, the basis for his argument, lack any legitimate evidentiary support and render his conclusion unacceptable.

In addition, The author makes several assumptions that remain unproven. The author considers a recent poll as the indicator of people’s concern about environmental issues. But author forgets that this survey might represent a small fraction of people who are aware of environmental concerns. Author make another assumption that seeing the environment organization’s logo on credit card will fetch new users and will motivate the existing users to spend more. But, again author fails to give any solid example to prove this assumption. So, the author weakens his argument by making assumptions and failing to provide the explications.

The author weakens his argument by making assumptions and failing to provide explication of the links between X and Y he assumes exists.

While the author does have several key issues in his argument’s premises and assumptions, that is not to say that entire argument is without base. With the increasing environmental awareness, the author is right in proposing that use of an environmental organizations’ logo will bolster the company’s environment friendly image among the customers. If author can provide some evidence to prove that using environment organization’s logo will bring new customers then author’s argument can be verified. Though there are several key issues with the author’s reasoning at present, with research and clarification, he could improve his argument significantly.

In sum, the author’s illogical argument is based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions that render his conclusion invalid. If the author truly goes to change his reader’s minds on the issue, he would have to largely restructure his argument, fix the flaws in his logic, clearly explicate his assumptions, and provide evidentiary support. Without these things, his poorly reasoned argument will convince few people. or

~~~~~~ In sum, I feel that the argument would have been strengthened considerably if it mentioned {the extent of change in profits, the factors that contributed to this change and whether they were linked with the change in ownership of Croesus Co or not.} Without this information the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.__________________I think, Therefore I am

Ex-3.Argument

Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize profits.

Response

Experience has a great thing in itself as it makes you more efficient and tells what is the efficient method to do a particular Job, that’s why great organizations completely relies on experiences resources and sometimes they are asked to develop SOPs (Standard

operating procedure ), that further helps organization and make sure no one is trying to reinvent the wheel. As someone also said experience makes a man perfect, same applies for organizations also. Experienced organizations know how to do things better in time (or sometimes before time) that further reduces the cost specifically the operational cost.

In the preceding statement author claims that processing cost go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. Though his claim may have merit, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument based on several questionable premises and assumptions, and based solely on the evidence the author offers; we can not accept his argument as valid

The primary issue with the author’s reasoning lies in his unsubstantiated premises. Author claims in 1970, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell 50 cents for five day service (that is 50/5=10 cent per day ) to 20 cents for one day service in 1984, however in reality if you have closer look in 1970 the cost was 10 cent per day and 20 cent in 1984 respectively. That means there is an increase of 10 cent per day in 14 years time span. Where is cost reduction? Secondary author didn’t mention the parameter on which cost is measured; May be reduction is just because of used material cost is getting down due to technology enhancement. For an example if a processing required rubber as a raw material, I am sure since 1970 to 1984 there would be significant difference in processing cost. It is not just because of that we learned how to do things better, instead Rubber cost itself is getting down as we learned more advanced and cheaper technology for Rubber manufacturing. The author premises, the basis of his argument, lack any legitimate evidentiary support and render his conclusion unacceptable.

In addition, the author makes several assumptions that remain unproven. First, the author doesn’t mention how the processing of food would get cheaper ; as per current scenario people are getting more conscious towards health and food processing organization are struggling that how to provide more healthier food .And in-fact it requires advanced technology ,henceforth higher the processing cost. For an example in US organic food is much more costlier due to its processing and this cost is getting up each subsequent year as almost every year food scientist/inventor are developing new technology that further cost little high comparatively. Secondary, the author didn’t provide how the food would quality would be maintained while trying to reduce the processing cost. The author weakens his argument by making assumptions and failing to provide explication of the links between processing of material and processing of food he assumes exists.

While the author does have several key issues in his argument’s premises and assumptions that is not to say that the entire argument is without base. Author could have made his argument more reasonable by providing the parameters on which he counted cost and food industry relationship with other manufacturing industries, moreover the explanation on how the food processing cost would go low would impacting quality, would be helpful Though there are several issues with author’s reasoning at present, with research and clarification, He could improve his argument significantly.

In sum, the author illogical argument is based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions that render his conclusion invalid. The lack of cost

measurement parameters, food industry relationship with all other industries and how to maintain food quality while keep on reducing the processing cost on incremental basis. If the author truly hopes to change his readers mind on the issue, he would have to largely restructure his argument, fix the flaws in his logic, clearly explicate his assumptions and provide evidentiary support. Without these things, his poorly reasoned argument will convince few people.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--~~~~ I feel that the argument would have been strengthened considerably if it mentioned the extent of change in profits, the factors that contributed to this change and whether they were linked with the change in ownership of Croesus Co or not. Without this information the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.__________________I think, Therefore I am

or

I feel that the argument could have been considerably strengthened if it mentioned all the relevant facts. In order to assess the merit of a particular decision it is essential to have full knowledge of all the contributing factors . In this particular case, information regarding the overall performance, market conditions, competency of the CEO and the particular reasons for the poor performance of the Hardware division should have been mentioned in the argument. In absence of this specific information the argument is a mere allegation with no legs to stand on.__________________I think, Therefore I am

I'm sorry guys – I really didn't use a template for issue essays! I did those far more on the fly since those were more question-specific than argument essays. I guess a general template would be P1 - Intro and a thesis P2 - Example 1 (usually in depth) P3 - Example 2 (in depth) P4 - Exploring the nuances of the question -- ie, why the opposing position is not entirely wrong. This shows I understand that the issue is not black and white. P5 - Conclusion

In general, do not take one side of the argument completely. A good rule of thumb is to argue your opinion at about 60 percent or 70 percent. I should emphasize this—even if you believe you are one hundred percent correct, you should still pretend that you are 60 or 70 percent correct.First Paragraph: IntroductionThe issue/belief/idea/opinion that ______________________________________ is an interesting/controversial one. This issue is increasingly important in this age of ___________________________. Many people believe _________________________, but these people overlook _________________________________________________. Furthermore, _____________________________________. In this essay, I will argue that __________________________________________________ _______________.

Second Paragraph: SupportThere are many good reasons for ____________________________. However, it cannot be ignored/overlooked that ___________________________. A classic example of this is

___________________________________________ . Try to add something interesting in this paragraph. Make sure you use a few complicated structures—try putting a subordinate clause first. Like this: While many type of professional promote the notion that _____________________________, I believe the opposite should be argued given the current situation/status/ of ____________________________________.

ConclusionI have argued _______________________. This view will become increasingly dominant in the coming century given ________________________________. Many of these issues can never be resolved to everybody’s satisfaction, but in the long run, promoting ________________________________ will lead to the betterment of all involved. Finally, _____________________________ increased something like global cooperation, cultural understanding, blah, blah, blah can only result from this, resulting in ______________________________ for everybody.

Example: "It is unrealistic to expect individual nations to make, independently, the sacrifices necessary to conserve energy. International leadership and worldwide cooperation are essential if we expect to protect the world's energy resources for future generations."



The chief reason for my view is that in today's world development is impossible without cooperation. If countries of Middle East region are rich in non-renewable energy resources like oil than countries like USA and France are rich in renewable energy resources like nuclear energy. Without cooperation among various countries sustained development is not possible. When countries like India fail to satisfy their energy needs on their own, they are dependent on oil and gas from Middle East. Further, when technologically starved nations like Bhutan and Myanmar want to harness their renewable energy sources, they are dependent on India for technical support.


Global cooperation in energy conservation will lead to a fair share in the pie for everyone . The developed countries like US can use their technological and scientific advancement to harness new energy sources and to develop more efficient techniques, and they can share the new advances with the developing world. This will led to energy conservation on a global level. Further, associations like G8 should take the initiative in this direction since they have the money and technological edge to make it possible.


Another good awa template:http://gmatclub.com/forum/how-to-get-6-0-awa-my-guide-64327.html

http://gmatclub.com/forum/how-to-get-6-0-awa-my-guide-64327.html

Documents

Awa Template