Dear All,
This is my first attempt at AWA essays so I would really appreciate any feedback and ratings. I later went through a lot of the tips and old essays so I hope my next attempt will be better but would also appreciate a rating on this so I know where to focus my efforts!
You can use the poll or write your critique or both.
Thanks I appreciate your help!
Analysis of Argument Essay below
THE QUESTION:
The following appeared in a proposal for a high school's annual fundraising event:
"In order to earn the most money for supplemental school programs, we will have larger and more thrilling rides at this year's School Fair, including a ferris wheel that is twice as tall as last year's ferris wheel. In addition, the game vendors will award more expensive prizes and the food stalls will showcase a variety of upscale international dishes. As a result, we will be able to charge a higher entrance fee and the dollar amount we earn via our commission on the vendors' revenues will be higher than it was last year."
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.
MY RESPONSE:
The proposal above looks to increase the funds raised for the school by increasing the entrance fee to their fundraiser. The underlying assumptions to the conclusion are that visitors are that while scale and quality of rides increase costs will remain the same and visitors will be willing to incur higher expenses at the event.
The major flaw in the argument is that while an increased entry fee would increase revenues the proposal does not consider the increased costs associated with having larger rides, more expensive prizes and more exotic food. These are both direct costs to the school through the vendor fees as well as indirect costs such as electricity, ingredients, logistical costs etc. A slightly more detailed account of projected costs and revenues would better substantiate the claim that revenues would exceed the operating costs generating more money for the schools supplemental programs.
Another factor that could potentially counter the arguments conclusion is the volition of the visitors. The proposal assumes that the increased costs of the event for the visitor i.e higher entrance fee and potentially higher game and ride costs would not dissuade people from visiting the event. It is assumed that the upgraded ride, game and food attractions are more attractive than a lower price point. While this is possible there is no evidence to substantiate the claim. The argument would be more sound if there were some information on what the people want.
It is my opinion that while entirely plausible if the underlying assumptions are considered valid without some evidence of their validity the argument above seems weak and logically unsound.
This is my first attempt at AWA essays so I would really appreciate any feedback and ratings. I later went through a lot of the tips and old essays so I hope my next attempt will be better but would also appreciate a rating on this so I know where to focus my efforts!
You can use the poll or write your critique or both.
Thanks I appreciate your help!
Analysis of Argument Essay below
THE QUESTION:
The following appeared in a proposal for a high school's annual fundraising event:
"In order to earn the most money for supplemental school programs, we will have larger and more thrilling rides at this year's School Fair, including a ferris wheel that is twice as tall as last year's ferris wheel. In addition, the game vendors will award more expensive prizes and the food stalls will showcase a variety of upscale international dishes. As a result, we will be able to charge a higher entrance fee and the dollar amount we earn via our commission on the vendors' revenues will be higher than it was last year."
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.
MY RESPONSE:
The proposal above looks to increase the funds raised for the school by increasing the entrance fee to their fundraiser. The underlying assumptions to the conclusion are that visitors are that while scale and quality of rides increase costs will remain the same and visitors will be willing to incur higher expenses at the event.
The major flaw in the argument is that while an increased entry fee would increase revenues the proposal does not consider the increased costs associated with having larger rides, more expensive prizes and more exotic food. These are both direct costs to the school through the vendor fees as well as indirect costs such as electricity, ingredients, logistical costs etc. A slightly more detailed account of projected costs and revenues would better substantiate the claim that revenues would exceed the operating costs generating more money for the schools supplemental programs.
Another factor that could potentially counter the arguments conclusion is the volition of the visitors. The proposal assumes that the increased costs of the event for the visitor i.e higher entrance fee and potentially higher game and ride costs would not dissuade people from visiting the event. It is assumed that the upgraded ride, game and food attractions are more attractive than a lower price point. While this is possible there is no evidence to substantiate the claim. The argument would be more sound if there were some information on what the people want.
It is my opinion that while entirely plausible if the underlying assumptions are considered valid without some evidence of their validity the argument above seems weak and logically unsound.
