Hi,
This is my first essay. please grade it and let me know the area of improvements. Thanks.
The following appeared in a memorandum issued by a large city’s council on the arts:
“In a recent citywide poll, 15 percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our city’s art museums has increased by a similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports public television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, we can expect that attendance at our city’s art museums will also start to decrease. Thus some of the city’s funds for supporting the arts should be reallocated to public television.”
---------------------------------------------------------
The author concludes that city funds should be diverted to public television to promote visual arts because the corporate funding which sponsors the visual arts on television is going to have severe cuts. In support of this conclusion author presents the statistics that there has been 15% increase in the visual arts lovers in the city. Although the conclusion sounds convincing but there are few concerns that needs to be addressed.
To begin with, the assumption about the increase in the visitors to museum is due to the increase in the viewership of visual arts programs on the television is questionable. This assumption weakens the argument because increase of visitors to museum could have been due to introduction of the new informative shows or tours that are being conducted for the people telling those more about the city’s history or the museum hours are being extended and made convenient for the people.
Secondly, the author did not explain the need for the diversion of city funds for supporting public television. Corporate funds are for the public television overall and not for the arts programs only. Thus it is not known how much funds need to be reallocated. Moreover, the funds that are being diverted to public television could be used for better social cause in the city. Author failed to bring out the value addition to people and city done by reallocating the city funds to public television.
In sum, the argument may be somewhat convincing but not compelling. To strengthen the conclusion that city’s funds for supporting the arts should be reallocated to public television, the author would have to provide evidence to prove that increase in the visitors to museum is due to promotion of arts on public television.
This is my first essay. please grade it and let me know the area of improvements. Thanks.
The following appeared in a memorandum issued by a large city’s council on the arts:
“In a recent citywide poll, 15 percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our city’s art museums has increased by a similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports public television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, we can expect that attendance at our city’s art museums will also start to decrease. Thus some of the city’s funds for supporting the arts should be reallocated to public television.”
---------------------------------------------------------
The author concludes that city funds should be diverted to public television to promote visual arts because the corporate funding which sponsors the visual arts on television is going to have severe cuts. In support of this conclusion author presents the statistics that there has been 15% increase in the visual arts lovers in the city. Although the conclusion sounds convincing but there are few concerns that needs to be addressed.
To begin with, the assumption about the increase in the visitors to museum is due to the increase in the viewership of visual arts programs on the television is questionable. This assumption weakens the argument because increase of visitors to museum could have been due to introduction of the new informative shows or tours that are being conducted for the people telling those more about the city’s history or the museum hours are being extended and made convenient for the people.
Secondly, the author did not explain the need for the diversion of city funds for supporting public television. Corporate funds are for the public television overall and not for the arts programs only. Thus it is not known how much funds need to be reallocated. Moreover, the funds that are being diverted to public television could be used for better social cause in the city. Author failed to bring out the value addition to people and city done by reallocating the city funds to public television.
In sum, the argument may be somewhat convincing but not compelling. To strengthen the conclusion that city’s funds for supporting the arts should be reallocated to public television, the author would have to provide evidence to prove that increase in the visitors to museum is due to promotion of arts on public television.
