GMAT Essays (AWA)

Hi, could anyone please review this AWA GMAT essay. I am planning to give GMAT in a month. It would be of great help if someone can review the essay and provide feedback/suggestions on how the essay can be improved. Thanks.

The following appeared in a memorandum from the business planning department of Avia Airlines:

"Of all the cities in their region, Beaumont and Fletcher are showing the fastest growth in the number of new businesses. Therefore, Avia should establish a commuter route between them as a means of countering recent losses on its main passenger routes. And to make the commuter route more profitable from the outset , Avia should offer a 1/3 discount on tickets purchased within two days of the flight. Unlike tickets bought earlier, discount tickets will be non refundable, and so gain from their sale will be greater."

Describe how well reasoned you find this argument. In the discussion be sure to analyse 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 argument's conclusion. You may also address possible changes in the argument that would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.


The Business planning department of Avia airlines proposed that they should establish a commuter route connecting Beaumont and Fletcher, the fastest growing cities in new businesses in their region, hoping that this would counter the recent losses in its main passenger routes. Also, to increase profitability, Avia should offer 33 % discount on the tickets bought within two days of flight and the discounted tickets sold would be non-refundable.

The success of the recommendation is doubtful considering the logical flaws and the faulty assumptions on which it is based. The argument reveals examples of poor reasoning and fails to mention several key factors on the basis of which it could have been evaluated. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there are no clear evidences. Hence the argument is weak and has several flaws which are mentioned below.

First, the Business planning department readily assumed that Beaumont and Fletcher are the main passenger routes since these are fastest growing cities in new businesses. The department claims that lot of passengers would be flying frequently between these two cities for business reasons. The argument fails to provide any evidences/statistical data to demonstrate on how Beaumont and Fletcher stands as one of the main passenger routes in the region and also on the type of passengers who flies between those two cities. The argument could haver been a lot clearer if it explicitly stated that the passengers who fly mostly between these two cities fly for business reasons rather than for personal or for vacationing purposes.

Second, it has been understood from several surveys conducted recently in the region, that people prefer to purchase refundable tickets rather than non-refundable ones, because, if there are any last minute travel plan changes, Avia Airlines do not offer the flexibility of cancelling or rescheduling flight tickets and the passenger ends up in losing the entire flight ticket price. Already, there are a number of existing airlines that provide both discounted and refundable ticket options to passengers for the same routes , so the passengers would prefer to purchase tickets from those airlines rather than from Avia Airlines . Also, if the argument had provided data on the discounted prices of Avia tickets compared with the lowest fare prices of other airlines for any respective routes, then it would have been easier to evaluate whether the proposed strategy would work or not. What if, the Avia fare prices are still high among any routes even post discount compared to other airlines non-discounted tickets, then the passengers would not prefer to purchase tickets from Avia Airlines and the plan would not likely work.

Third, the Business department have assumed that reducing fare prices/offering discounts would be the only way to draw passengers and increase its tickets sale. The department fails to consider other plausible factors such as - on-time arrival/departure of their flights, service of flight - crew members, food offered in flights etc which also contributes towards flight tickets sales and helps passengers to choose among airlines they would prefer to travel.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. It could have been considerably strengthened if the department had clearly mentioned all the relevant facts. In order to assess the merits of a situation, it is essential to have the full knowledge of all the contributing factors. Without this information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.

Hello Katharine,

Thanks a lot for reviewing the essay and providing your suggestions on the same.The suggestions are really very useful and will help me to work towards improving my future essays.

Thanks,
Shreyasee

Hello Katharine,

I have tried to improve my essay writing style based on your earlier suggestions. Can you please have a look at the below essay and provide your feedback on the same. Will be eagerly waiting for your response.

Many thanks,
Shreyasee

Topic:
The following appeared in a letter from a staff member in the office of admissions at Argent University:

"The most recent nationwide surveys show that undergraduates choose their major field primarily based on their perception of job prospects in that field. At our university, economics is now the most popular major, so students must perceive this field as having the best job prospects. Therefore, we can increase our enrolment if we focus our advertising and recruiting on publicizing our best-known economics professors and the success of our economics graduates in finding employment."


Describe how well reasoned you find this argument. In the discussion be sure to analyse 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 argument's conclusion. You may also address possible changes in the argument that would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.



The staff member in the office of admissions at Argent University claims that the university should focus on publishing the accomplishments of its best known economics professors and advertising the success of economic graduates in finding jobs. He recommends to implement this plan in order to increase student enrollment in economics since economics is the most popular major in the university and students would perceive this field as having the best job prospects. The staff member presented a poorly reasoned argument based on several questionable premises and assumptions, and based solely on the evidence he offers we cannot accept his argument as valid.

The primary issue with the staff member's reasoning lies in his unsubstantiated premises.
The member states that since economics is the most popular major at Argent University so students would think that this field have better job prospects compared to other subjects taught at the university. This claim is made based on the results of a recent survey where it was shown that undergraduates choose their major fields at university based on the future job prospects in that field. Firstly, the claim is made based on a results of a survey about which not much information has been provided by the staff member; it is essential to know who participated in the survey, how the survey was conducted, are the survey findings based on details shared by many students or only a few students in order to accept the findings from the survey as valid. Secondly, just because economics is the most popular major in the university doesn't necessarily means that students will choose economics ; a subject which is popular in the university does not guarantee the fact that it will have better job prospects. The staff member's premises, the basis for his argument lacks any legitimate evidentiary support and render his conclusion as unacceptable.

In addition, the staff member makes several assumptions that remain unproven. The staff member readily assumes that by solely focussing on advertising the success of the economics graduates and publishing the accomplishments of economics professors would lead to increase in enrolment. He assumes that an university which have good economics professor provides good education in economics. What if the professors devote most of their time in their own research work rather than in teaching at classrooms, what if most of the good professors are visiting faculties rather than full time professors; in this scenario, the member's claim is not justified at all. Also, the member states that the university should publish the job success rate of their economics graduates; he fails to provide information regarding how many students had been successful in finding employment ; what if the number of students are quite low compared to students of other university. Also, the member assumes that the education provided by the university solely helped the student to find jobs rather than the personal accomplishments of the students. The staff member weakens his argument by making assumptions and fails to provide suitable explications for the same.

While, the staff member does have several key issues with his argument's premises and assumptions at present, that is not to say that his entire argument is without base. The staff member could have considerably strengthened his argument if he had provided details about the nature of the survey in order to reinstate the validity of the survey findings. If the member had provided evidences/data to demonstrate how many economics students had been successful in finding jobs and how the university and the professors had helped the students in doing so, his claim would have been significantly justified .Though there are several issues with the member's reasoning at present, with research and clarifications, he can improve his argument significantly.

In sum, the staff member's illogical argument is based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions. If the staff member truly hopes to change his reader's mind on the issue, he would then largely have to restructure his argument, fix the flaws in his logic, clearly explicate his assumptions and provide evidentiary support. Without this, his poorly reasoned argument will likely convince few people.

Hi Katharine,

Just wanted to say thanks to you..
I got my Official GMAT score report today and have scored 6 in AWA section.
Thanks a lot for all your feedback and help with the AWA.

Many thanks,
Shreyasee