Hi,
Would like to know my current level in essay. Can any expect please evaluate and rate my essays.
ESSAY QUESTION:
"Employees always perform better when given a say in determining the boundaries of their roles within a company."
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.
YOUR RESPONSE:
As per the argument, if the management makes sure that it talks to employee and takes care of the boundaries of his/her role accordingly, then it increases the performance of employee. In this discussion I will write in favor of this argument.
It is true that everyone is not alike. Everyone is having different career aspirations and different priorities. Some people take a lot of interest in whatever work has been assigned to them and others do a lot of work towards their interest. But it is true in more of the cases that if person is doing work of his own interest (at office or at home), his performance surely increases.
An employee who is having high ambitions in life and want to take up additional responsibilities at work, will perform better if he/she is assigned not only assigned duty, but also other works. For example, my manager at work although a Project Manager, but likes to make sales connect as well. Seeing to his interest, my group manager talked to him if he wants to take up additional responsibilities of Sales Calls which he eagerly agreed to. After this, his performance in Project has increased without affecting his Sales work and he is a happy person at workplace.
On the other hand if a person is having different priorities in life and has been assigned additional responsibilities at work without talking to him, then it is surely going to affect his performance at all work areas.
As another example of this, my organization is having a program named "Career goal" with four phases. In phases one, one defines his/her current role, in phase two, one defines the kind of role he/she would like to play in organization and phase three, he/she is initially given the new role as an additional responsibility. After one year, his/her performance is evaluated at both assigned work and additional responsibilities. If case it is proved that his/her performance has been good in additional responsibilities without affecting the performance at the assigned work, one is given the opportunity either to choose from the areas or else continue working in both the areas. He/she is given additional incentives for his performance during the year.
So overall we can say that, if a person's views are taken into consideration while defining the work boundaries for him/her, then it will surely help increase his performance.
ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in a science magazine:
"The "Space Race" of the 1960's between the USA and Russia was very expensive but it yielded a tremendous number of technological advances. These advances have provided many economic and humanitarian benefits. The benefits have more than paid for the effort and money spent during the Space Race and therefore the government should make allowances within the budget to pay for a manned Mars landing by 2020."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
YOUR RESPONSE:
The argument states that the Space Exploration done by USA and Russia in 1960's has yielded a lot of technological advances and thus have provided economic and humanitarian benefits. Comparing it with the Manned Mars Landing mission having a target of year 2020, author says that govt. should keep budgets to pay for this mission as well. The argument is based on few assumptions such as it is USA and Russian governments who need to keep budget for the Mars mission, the two governments are still having independent MARS missions and the amount of budget increase for this mission will not be exponentially higher than that assigned for the Space Race of 1960's.
For evaluating the argument, it is important to consider a few points. Is it expected that exploration of MARS will lead anything better for people on earth? If MARS exploration is expected to provide some resources which are important or good for people on earth (economic and/or humanitarian benefits) then its a good idea to put in money, but in case it is only for science exploration, then it might not be a good idea to waste so much resources and money for this mission.
A reason why 1960's Space Race resulted in better output was that Space was unexplored by that time. And the area of exploration was more of Space rather than any other planet.
Another thing to evaluate here is whether Manned MARS mission is going to lead to something better than the current Missions having a Robot deployed and Remote Monitoring it from earth. This is to be evaluated because a Manned mission is going to increase the cost of mission exponentially.
One more important point here is if after putting so much budget in Afghan and Iraq war, USA is still willing to put in a good amount of money for this mission and that it will not put in extra burden of tax payers and the economy of USA.
So overall we can say that before continuing such mission, a proper Cost Benefit analysis is necessary. In case t comes out that the benefits are much more than the Cost to be incurred, then it is good idea for governments to keep allowances within the budget to pay for this mission. If not, then money should rather be invested in other fields of Space Exploration and/or other technologies.
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
Help Evaluate my Essay
This topic has expert replies
-
shikhargmat
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 18
- Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 11:39 am
-
Jim@Grockit
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 641
- Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 3:07 pm
- Location: Madison, WI
- Thanked: 162 times
- Followed by:45 members
- GMAT Score:760
1. Excellent use of examples! If you can maintain that level of focus on the test, you will be in good shape. Specific, real-world examples (like the ones you chose) are the best; specific ones that are fictional can substitute, but you should back up every one of your main points with examples in the Issue essay.
2. You have some padding in your essay, especially in your intro to the Issue essay. This usually happens when people are "warming up" to the topic as they type their essays, and usually does not happen when people do some basic outlining before they begin typing. Yours is by no means bad, but rather than: "Here I restate the argument [whatever it is]. I will now agree with the argument. Every situation is different. Here is one way, Y, that every situation is different. Here is another way, Z, that every situation is different. My main points will be A, B, and C", you can consider diving more directly into the topic: "I agree with the argument that [whatever the argument is]. Factors such as Y and Z make every situation different, but elements A, B, and C [the points of your essay] support the general statement." A more direct intro like that requires knowing what all of your points are going to be in the essay, or writing it after you've written the main points.
3. Your Analyze an Argument essay is great -- it has clear "signposts" at the beginning of each paragraph, and a conclusion that really concludes. The essay on the Issue doesn't have as many of those, and the conclusion is weak -- whenever you have time, restate your main points in the conclusion.
4. You definitely have some grammar concerns, especially in the first essay; any further work you put into GMAT SC should help you there.
I tend to be a hard grader, so I'd give the Issue Essay a 4, and the Argument Essay a 4.5
2. You have some padding in your essay, especially in your intro to the Issue essay. This usually happens when people are "warming up" to the topic as they type their essays, and usually does not happen when people do some basic outlining before they begin typing. Yours is by no means bad, but rather than: "Here I restate the argument [whatever it is]. I will now agree with the argument. Every situation is different. Here is one way, Y, that every situation is different. Here is another way, Z, that every situation is different. My main points will be A, B, and C", you can consider diving more directly into the topic: "I agree with the argument that [whatever the argument is]. Factors such as Y and Z make every situation different, but elements A, B, and C [the points of your essay] support the general statement." A more direct intro like that requires knowing what all of your points are going to be in the essay, or writing it after you've written the main points.
3. Your Analyze an Argument essay is great -- it has clear "signposts" at the beginning of each paragraph, and a conclusion that really concludes. The essay on the Issue doesn't have as many of those, and the conclusion is weak -- whenever you have time, restate your main points in the conclusion.
4. You definitely have some grammar concerns, especially in the first essay; any further work you put into GMAT SC should help you there.
I tend to be a hard grader, so I'd give the Issue Essay a 4, and the Argument Essay a 4.5
-
loveusonu
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:17 pm
- Location: Bangalore,India
- Thanked: 17 times
Mutual Learning: Wrote the same essay so that we both can learn each other way of thinking, writing style etc..
Shikhar\homullus, Would appreciate if you could review.
ESSAY QUESTION:
"Employees always perform better when given a say in determining the boundaries of their roles within a company."
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 that employees always perform better when provided with an opportunity to say in determining the boundaries of their roles is quite controversial one. On one hand employees performance is closely correlated with what they think and say, on other hand, employees performance may get severely impacted by not adhering to general challenging principles of their roles. However, I believe giving a chance to speak out will not bring out the better performance in Employees than without.
The first reason for my belief is following the principles of being equal. Giving a generalized set of boundaries will challenge the employees with what they haven't even thought off, bringing the best along with it. Every mortal is unique in its thoughts and will only be able to achieve what he thinks he may do at some point. And it's a well-known fact that first step to achieve success or perform better is the ability to think he or she can. The opinion of each and every employee will vary based on his thinking and hence no challenge and no equal measure to judge the potential of the person among the rest. Second, the lack of generalized opinion may create business obstacles such as customer centric roles or opinion being not in alignment with business requirement. Third, People opinion may be manipulative and self-oriented and hence would not bring out a best productivity for employers.
For example, consider a role of consultant, he might require to several task and has certain responsibilities towards business. But a role of consultant, or for that sake any role, have infinite boundaries. Beyond delivering to clients, he even has to maintain a source of revenue. If given a say, Each individual Consultant would only limit himself or herself with whatever he thinks or had seen so far. This will not challenge him potentially. He will also be tend to get manipulated by the things that works best for him and therefore define those as his boundaries, limiting his potential learning. In such situation client may also get impacted and hence performance would not be optimal.
One might say, determining one self boundaries will make oneself clear about his task and responsibilities. However understanding the current requirements of the roles and excelling at those have much more potential to bring out best productivity from employees than limiting themselves within their opinion.
Considering all the above reasons, I believe a standardized set of boundaries, good if they are too far to achieve thoroughly, should be provided to all employees in a current role.
ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in a science magazine:
"The "Space Race" of the 1960's between the USA and Russia was very expensive but it yielded a tremendous number of technological advances. These advances have provided many economic and humanitarian benefits. The benefits have more than paid for the effort and money spent during the Space Race and therefore the government should make allowances within the budget to pay for a manned Mars landing by 2020."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
According to author of the science magazine article, the government should make allowances within budget to pay for Mars landing by 2020. He justified his reasoning by providing results of the previous
"space race" that brought technological advances. Despites providing lucrative reasoning, the authors conclusion is completely illogical because of following assumptions and flaws.
The author assumes that previous "space race" bought fruitful technological results would be repeated if tried in today's scenario. One must be aware of the fact that situation from "space race" era is quite different than today's era and hence previous decision may not be valid today. Moreover, the fruitful results may turn out to of no use, unlike in past. The Space race might have brought television network today but there is no guarantee that Mars mission will also bring out something fruitful. He also assumes that today we require space exploration rather than other priorities for the welfare of society. Today human have priorities to grow and make life better within their ecosystem. The Mars mission doesn't seem to provide any such result. Another assumption is that tax payer who ultimately pays for such allowances would be completely in favor of such expense rather than believing their money to be use to solve their problems. Finally, the cost to benefit ratio, unlike in previous instances, seems to be too high and not completely justified.
The demerit behind such mission is also evident from the example of Moon mission in 1968. NASA stopped the mission from thereon considering the high cost to benefit ratio. The Mars mission may seems to be on the same lines and end up in wastage of too many resources, including money.
The author's argument can be further weaken if it's shown that there is no possibility of benefits from the remote powerful satellites. Other concrete evidence that shows such activity can be carried out from earth itself would further weaken the argument.
The author's argument can be strengthen if several facts like survey of tax payer, possible benefits my such missions are shown. He could also provide information to justify the cost involved in this task. Providing more important facts and figures with the comparison from past and present would be vital to conclude.
Due to all above reasons, the author's argument turns out to be completely invalid and he seems too opportunistic to conclude based on the cited premises.
Thanks in advance!
Shikhar\homullus, Would appreciate if you could review.
ESSAY QUESTION:
"Employees always perform better when given a say in determining the boundaries of their roles within a company."
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 that employees always perform better when provided with an opportunity to say in determining the boundaries of their roles is quite controversial one. On one hand employees performance is closely correlated with what they think and say, on other hand, employees performance may get severely impacted by not adhering to general challenging principles of their roles. However, I believe giving a chance to speak out will not bring out the better performance in Employees than without.
The first reason for my belief is following the principles of being equal. Giving a generalized set of boundaries will challenge the employees with what they haven't even thought off, bringing the best along with it. Every mortal is unique in its thoughts and will only be able to achieve what he thinks he may do at some point. And it's a well-known fact that first step to achieve success or perform better is the ability to think he or she can. The opinion of each and every employee will vary based on his thinking and hence no challenge and no equal measure to judge the potential of the person among the rest. Second, the lack of generalized opinion may create business obstacles such as customer centric roles or opinion being not in alignment with business requirement. Third, People opinion may be manipulative and self-oriented and hence would not bring out a best productivity for employers.
For example, consider a role of consultant, he might require to several task and has certain responsibilities towards business. But a role of consultant, or for that sake any role, have infinite boundaries. Beyond delivering to clients, he even has to maintain a source of revenue. If given a say, Each individual Consultant would only limit himself or herself with whatever he thinks or had seen so far. This will not challenge him potentially. He will also be tend to get manipulated by the things that works best for him and therefore define those as his boundaries, limiting his potential learning. In such situation client may also get impacted and hence performance would not be optimal.
One might say, determining one self boundaries will make oneself clear about his task and responsibilities. However understanding the current requirements of the roles and excelling at those have much more potential to bring out best productivity from employees than limiting themselves within their opinion.
Considering all the above reasons, I believe a standardized set of boundaries, good if they are too far to achieve thoroughly, should be provided to all employees in a current role.
ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in a science magazine:
"The "Space Race" of the 1960's between the USA and Russia was very expensive but it yielded a tremendous number of technological advances. These advances have provided many economic and humanitarian benefits. The benefits have more than paid for the effort and money spent during the Space Race and therefore the government should make allowances within the budget to pay for a manned Mars landing by 2020."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
According to author of the science magazine article, the government should make allowances within budget to pay for Mars landing by 2020. He justified his reasoning by providing results of the previous
"space race" that brought technological advances. Despites providing lucrative reasoning, the authors conclusion is completely illogical because of following assumptions and flaws.
The author assumes that previous "space race" bought fruitful technological results would be repeated if tried in today's scenario. One must be aware of the fact that situation from "space race" era is quite different than today's era and hence previous decision may not be valid today. Moreover, the fruitful results may turn out to of no use, unlike in past. The Space race might have brought television network today but there is no guarantee that Mars mission will also bring out something fruitful. He also assumes that today we require space exploration rather than other priorities for the welfare of society. Today human have priorities to grow and make life better within their ecosystem. The Mars mission doesn't seem to provide any such result. Another assumption is that tax payer who ultimately pays for such allowances would be completely in favor of such expense rather than believing their money to be use to solve their problems. Finally, the cost to benefit ratio, unlike in previous instances, seems to be too high and not completely justified.
The demerit behind such mission is also evident from the example of Moon mission in 1968. NASA stopped the mission from thereon considering the high cost to benefit ratio. The Mars mission may seems to be on the same lines and end up in wastage of too many resources, including money.
The author's argument can be further weaken if it's shown that there is no possibility of benefits from the remote powerful satellites. Other concrete evidence that shows such activity can be carried out from earth itself would further weaken the argument.
The author's argument can be strengthen if several facts like survey of tax payer, possible benefits my such missions are shown. He could also provide information to justify the cost involved in this task. Providing more important facts and figures with the comparison from past and present would be vital to conclude.
Due to all above reasons, the author's argument turns out to be completely invalid and he seems too opportunistic to conclude based on the cited premises.
Thanks in advance!
Sonu
--------
When you want something desperately, the whole Universe conspires in helping to give it to you - The Alchemist
--------
When you want something desperately, the whole Universe conspires in helping to give it to you - The Alchemist
Homullus, Great feedback.
I have a general question about length. What would you say is a typical essay length for both the Analysis of an Issue and Analysis of an Argument? With time being such a critical factor, I would think that you need to limit your argument, but also remain detailed and provide specific examples. I found I had enough time for my Analysis of an Argument, but I tended to rush my Issue practice essay as I dove deep into too many topics. What do you think? Any recommendations?
I've included my practice essays in case you'd like to have a look at specifics.
https://www.beatthegmat.com/essay-evalua ... tml#293849
https://www.beatthegmat.com/analysis-of- ... tml#293854
I have a general question about length. What would you say is a typical essay length for both the Analysis of an Issue and Analysis of an Argument? With time being such a critical factor, I would think that you need to limit your argument, but also remain detailed and provide specific examples. I found I had enough time for my Analysis of an Argument, but I tended to rush my Issue practice essay as I dove deep into too many topics. What do you think? Any recommendations?
I've included my practice essays in case you'd like to have a look at specifics.
https://www.beatthegmat.com/essay-evalua ... tml#293849
https://www.beatthegmat.com/analysis-of- ... tml#293854
-
Jim@Grockit
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 641
- Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 3:07 pm
- Location: Madison, WI
- Thanked: 162 times
- Followed by:45 members
- GMAT Score:760
Your essay should be as long as you can make it and still finish, basically, which varies from person to person. Outline first, and stick to a modest one. Your intro and conclusion should both allude to the points you make in the body paragraphs. If you finish early and have enough time, you can easily add another point, making sure to include a new body paragraph as well as references to it in the beginning and end. See what I mean? If the essay is planned before you start writing, you don't wander off topic, and can insert more once it's done.skalevar wrote:Homullus, Great feedback.
I have a general question about length. What would you say is a typical essay length for both the Analysis of an Issue and Analysis of an Argument? With time being such a critical factor, I would think that you need to limit your argument, but also remain detailed and provide specific examples. I found I had enough time for my Analysis of an Argument, but I tended to rush my Issue practice essay as I dove deep into too many topics. What do you think? Any recommendations?
I've included my practice essays in case you'd like to have a look at specifics.
https://www.beatthegmat.com/essay-evalua ... tml#293849
https://www.beatthegmat.com/analysis-of- ... tml#293854
An ok complete essay is better than an awesome one that doesn't do half of what it sets out to do.
-
Jim@Grockit
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 641
- Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 3:07 pm
- Location: Madison, WI
- Thanked: 162 times
- Followed by:45 members
- GMAT Score:760
Sonu--loveusonu wrote:Mutual Learning: Wrote the same essay so that we both can learn each other way of thinking, writing style etc..
Thanks in advance!
Issue Essay:
I like your thinking in your Issue essay! I would have written the essay from the opposite viewpoint, but I was very pleased to see a good, clear reasoning behind your choice. My main issue is with the organization of your essay -- you list all of your general points in the first body paragraph, and your specific examples in the second one. I actually didn't understand what you meant about some aspects of your argument until I got to the examples, when it became completely clear. If at all possible, organize your thoughts in the format [general statement + example/evidence] to make sure your reader is matching up the appropriate thoughts with your examples. You list three points in your "thoughts" paragraph, but I am not sure you have an example for each of them in the next. When outlining your essay, make a note of what example or evidence you're going to use with each major thought point.
Also, good job on the conclusion; you used the opportunity to give a little space to the opposing viewpoint, only to knock it down. The conclusion is a good place to put that so that it sounds different from the intro.
Argument Essay:
Resist the urge to label Argument Essays "completely illogical" as they will all be lacking key evidence to support their points: they would be terrible essay prompts if they were perfect essays! You would just write "well, I guess that's pretty good!" and sit there for the rest of the time. You do cover the strengthening as well as the weakening ideas, which is critical to a successful Argument essay; I urge you to pretend you are a consultant or a reviewer without bias, asked to help some third party decide what other information they need to make a decision based on the prompt. The argument will ALWAYS make sweeping generalizations and leave important data out; it is your job to name it and specify what different results would do to the overall argument. Make sense?
I favor organizing these essays according to the key data that's missing; on this one, they would be technological advances, humanitarian benefits (Cold War is over now!), and economic benefits, discussing in turn what result would validate the author's argument and what result would invalidate it. Devote a paragraph to each.
Your essay is definitely long and full enough, and you have some good examples in it; a more focused and less biased approach would allow you to concentrate more on the argument itself.
