GMAT Essays (AWA)

The following appeared as part of an article in a magazine on lifestyles.

"Two years ago, City L was listed 14th in an annual survey that ranks cities according to the quality of life that can be enjoyed by those living in them. This information will enable people who are moving to the state in which City L is located to confidently identify one place, at least, where schools are good, housing is affordable, people are friendly, the environment is safe, and the arts flourish."

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.

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

The above argument states that the high ranking of City L will provide people information about its schools, housing, people, environment and arts.
The argument assumes that the ranking criteria takes into consideration all the above factors. Since the argument does not provide any information about the criteria used in ranking City L, it is difficult to conclude that ranking will in fact provide information about schools, housing, e.t.c.

Moreover, even if ranking criterea takes into consideration all the above factors listed in the argument it does not provide other useful indicators such as jobs availability, taxes, weather.
For example another City Z ranked 5th in last year ranking, however it does not have enough jobs, taxes are high and it has severe weather. Thus, it ranked high still some people who moved there returned due to the fact that City Z does not have jobs, has high taxes and extreme cold winter.

To conclude, for the argument to be persuasive it should provide the criteria used in ranking City L and should also include other important factors in ranking City L.

You make a couple good points - you just need to write more. Your intro should restate the argument, state that it's poorly reasoned, and quickly list the reasons why. You should then have three body paragraphs (4 or 5 sentences each), each discussing a faulty assumption the author made. Also, remember to show how the author could have strengthened the argument.

Finally, your conclusion should again restate the argument and quickly reiterate the points you made in your body paragraphs.

I'll give you a 3 on this one.

Could someone please rate my essay.

We are living in a highly advanced technological era, we have lot of advantages which our forefathers could not have imagined, but this era also brings with it lot serious concerns threating the existence of our planet. Many people claim that city life is better because of the infrastructure and other easily accessible amenities , and few claim that village life is preferable due to less pollutioned environment. Choice here is subjective and it varies from person to person. Nevertheless, everyone wants better quality of life and thus the need for this survey becomes higly essentional. People shift to different parts of the world looking for better quality of life. Thus in the midst of all this chaos, arugment becomes debatable. As per the above mentioned facts, survey listed City L as 14 in the rankings based on the quality of life and author claims that this survey and ranking will help in people choosing the better place based on different parameters such as good schools, housing and safe environment.

Though I agree with author that parameters considered for choosing a city are valid, author's poorly reasoned depedency on only one survey and the lack of substantial evidence validate the authenticity of the survey make the whole argument questionable. The primary reason for this objection could be survey itself. There is nothing to verify the authenticity of the survey and author does not explain the process or criteria for ranking the
cities on quality of life. It could be possible survey is conducted on people which is not big enough to be representative set and thus survey itself could be biased. There is no clarity on the different kind of paramenters considered for ranking the cities. Survey may not have included even the parameters menitoned above in the argument.

Furthermore, it is clearly stated that ranking was published two years ago. In the existing fast moving world, changes happen instantaneously. For instance, Monterrey in Mexico was voted the safest city in 2009. Though there has been in spike in fights between drug mafias in other parts of mexico, monterrey was safest city among all cities in Mexico. By 2010, corrupt civil police had lost control over montrrey and monterrey became one of most dangerous cities in the whole of North america and latin america. Hence even if we we assume the survey is reliable, two years old data is too long a period to make your current decision. It is highly recommended that people study the current rankings before they make a decision.


In conslusion, above points prove that argument is poorly reasoned and more information is required to bring in the transperency into the survey.Author could make this argument more pusuasive by following these two points. As a first step, author should provide the more recent rankings of the survey, this would enable people make a better decision. In addition to this, it is very important that author lists all the variables considered for the survey. This would help people in validating the authenticity of the survey and people can give weightage to survey rankings based on the number of parameters relevant to them.