Dear Team, It would be great if someone can reveiw my essay attempt below ...
Prompt - Replacing the Mathescam Bridge, which links Ottenville with Tottenville, will prove far less beneficial than would repairing the existing structure. The project will unjustly hurt drivers because the Ottenville mayor recommended - shortly just before $12 million new bridge proposal was announced - that bridge tolls be raised by 50 percent. Since drivers' main complaints have been uneven pavement and closed lanes, the Mathescam bridge Authority should not hike tolls and instead repair the existing bridge, shifting maintenance crews to the evening, when a few drivers are on the roads.”
Discuss how well reasoned etc...
The passage appeared on the local newspaper suggesting that replacing mathescam bridge connecting Ottenville to Tottenville rather than replacing it and because it is more cost effective and the existing structure has minimum damages. The conclusion has arrived without proper data evidences and flawed assumptions based on drivers complaints and the mayor announcement of increased toll taxes. The gaps bridging the conclusion and the premise isn’t substantiated with convincing data.
Primarily, the author has linked the toll taxes 50% increase by Ottenville city mayor to the bridge construction project. The author has missed to the see the fact the bridge authorities and Ottenville city major are maybe two separate entities. And also, there is no guarantee that the mayor wont increase the toll taxes if the bridge isn’t replaced but only repaired. Moreover, a bridge might act as links connecting many cities and states. Assuming that the project should be called off because of one of the mayor’s decision is illogical. Besides there is no data to prove that the mayor has proposed the tax increase only to compensate the construction expenditure. Likewise, the construction cost is only proposed to be $12 million. There are high chances of for it to get renewed and the budget to be lesser than the actual proposed costs. Hence, it looks like the author has emotionally linked the construction costs and the tax addressing the driver’s sentiments without proper backup data.
Likewise, the author has concluded that repairing the existing bridge is enough because the drivers complained on uneven pavement and closed lanes. There is no expert advise quoted regarding the damages on the bridge. It is highly likely that the bridge authorities consulted with with the experts regarding the structure of the building , the damage and age of the architecture in order to take the decision of replacing the structure. So, citing only the driver’s complaints as a reason for opting for replacements is illogical and unconvincing .
And we can also see the suggestion to move the maintenance crew to the evening since there will be only few drivers . The author has failed to provide the statistics of number of vehicles differing form morning and evening. And there is no guarantee that there will be less vehicles in the evening.
To conclude, suggesting to repair a bridge sporting heavy vehicles like trucks instead of reconstruction without proper expert advise and to quote the drivers sentiments as reasons for the same seems an emotive hasty decision without proper analysis and evidences. Similarly, there is a lack of knowledge for the reasons behind the toll increase by Ottenville mayor . Had the author addressed all the above stated gaps, and provided scientific evidences regarding the repair, then this would have sounded a strong recommendation.
AWA Review - Can someone please review my AWA attempt
This topic has expert replies
Thank you for sharing!