Please rate me 2nd try (30 min, incl 3 min to reread)

This topic has expert replies
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2014 4:45 am
The following appeared in the editorial section of a local newspaper:
"Commuter use of the new subway train is exceeding the transit company's projections. However, commuter use of the shuttle buses that transport people to the subway stations is below the projected volume. If the transit company expects commuters to ride the shuttle buses to the subway rather than drive there, it must either reduce the shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking at the subway stations."
The author argues that the transit company should either reduce the shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking at the subway stations in order to push the commuters to ride the shuttle buses to the subway instead of drive there. Although the author's claim may have merit, his line of reasoning is flawed and thus his claim can't be accepted.

The primary issue with the author's claim comes from not properly analyzing the root cause of the less than projected shuttle rides. The author states that the commuter use of the shuttle buses that transport people to the subway stations is below the projected volume. He then proposes either to reduce prices of shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking in order to raise the shuttle bus commuters. The author is assuming that people who aren't taking the shuttle bus are driving to the subway. That is a flawed reasoning that could have multiple different answers. It could be possible that the commuters are walking to the subway train or they are being accompanied by someone or taking a cab or riding their bicycle. A deeper analysis of how people are getting to the subway train would be quite useful in proposing a solution.

The secondary issue with the author's claim comes from assuming that there's only a financial reason behind why commuters aren't taking the shuttle buses . There could be a whole lot of reasons why commuters are refusing to take the shuttle buses. It might be that the safety of these buses is below par and commuters would refuse to go on such buses even at a very low cost. Or that these buses take a long time to get to the subway train while commuters are looking for a faster transportation system.

Finally, it could very well be that the company's projections are incorrect. Small errors in the data that led to these projections could have caused the transit's company projections to be higher than what they should actually be.

In summary, the author's argument that the transit company can increase the shuttle bus rides by either reducing the shuttle bus fares or increasing the price of parking at the subway stations is flawed. It would be smart for the transit company to find the reason why not enough commuters are taking the shuttle bus instead of directly proposing measures to increase that number.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 2663
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 8:25 am
Location: Boston, MA
Thanked: 1153 times
Followed by:128 members
GMAT Score:770

by DavidG@VeritasPrep » Mon Feb 09, 2015 8:08 am
This essay looks very strong to me, Brulee. The prose is tight, you hit some of the most glaring gaps in the argument, and you structured your response well. My guess is you'd receive no lower than a 5.5.

There was one sentence that I don't think the reader will notice, but helps illustrate an important point for SC.

"He then proposes either to reduce prices of shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking in order to raise the shuttle bus commuters"

Remember, when we see the parallel marker "either" we want both elements following the marker to take the same structural form. So this should be: either to reduce..... or to increase

(The odds that the reader will 1) see this, and 2) care enough to penalize you are not high. But parallel construction shows up a lot in Sentence Correction, so you want to be mindful of it there.)
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course

Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2014 4:45 am

by Brulee » Mon Feb 09, 2015 12:28 pm
Thanks for your thorough answer and SC revision. I'm always short on time at the end so I speed things up and start doing mistakes. I will sligthly shorten the length of my essays which will give me time to improve its quality. Same for the new one I just posted.
DavidG@VeritasPrep wrote:This essay looks very strong to me, Brulee. The prose is tight, you hit some of the most glaring gaps in the argument, and you structured your response well. My guess is you'd receive no lower than a 5.5.

There was one sentence that I don't think the reader will notice, but helps illustrate an important point for SC.

"He then proposes either to reduce prices of shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking in order to raise the shuttle bus commuters"

Remember, when we see the parallel marker "either" we want both elements following the marker to take the same structural form. So this should be: either to reduce..... or to increase

(The odds that the reader will 1) see this, and 2) care enough to penalize you are not high. But parallel construction shows up a lot in Sentence Correction, so you want to be mindful of it there.)

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 2663
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 8:25 am
Location: Boston, MA
Thanked: 1153 times
Followed by:128 members
GMAT Score:770

by DavidG@VeritasPrep » Mon Feb 09, 2015 2:34 pm
Really, the goal with the essay is to meet a minimum quality threshold while conserving most of your mental energy for the more important parts of the exam. You easily exceeded that threshold with this example. Beyond continuing to write essays as part of your practice tests, I don't think it's worth your time to focus too much on the AWA. Keep up the good work!
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course