10 more days to go - Please rate my first AWA!

This topic has expert replies
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 8:57 am
Thanked: 11 times
Followed by:6 members
I so far mainly focused my preparation on IR, Quant and Verbal. After reading ARCO's "GMAT ANSWERS - to the real essay questions", I tried to tackle my first AWA today. Please rate it so I can get a feel, how much more time I should dedicate for AWA in the last remaining 10 days.

Question:

"In the first four years that Montoya has served as mayor of the city of San Perdito, the population has decreased and
the unemployment rate has increased. Two businesses have closed for each new business that has opened. Under
Varro, who served as mayor for four years before Montoya, the unemployment rate decreased and the population
increased. Clearly, the residents of San Perdito would be best served if they voted Montoya out of office and
reelected Varro."

Reponse:


The author of the argument concludes that the residents of San Perdito were served best, if Montoya gets voted out of office while Varro gets reelected. The line of reasoning is that since the population has decreased and the unemployment rate has increased while Montoya has served as a mayor, and the population had increased while the unemployment rate had decreased with Varro in charge, a reelection of Varro would have the best outcome for the residents of San Perdito. This argument is not very convincing as stated as it suffers from several critical flaws.

First of all, the argument depends on the oversimplifying assumption that the change in population and unemployment are directly correlated with the mayor in charge. Consequently it is assumed that Montoya directly caused an increase in the unemployment rate and a decrease in the population while Varro was directly responsible for decreasing the unemployment rate and increasing the population. However, there is no evidence given that would proof this direct cause-and-effect relationship. Instead, the change in unemployment rate and population might as well just have been caused by the global economy, which is only marginally influenced by the mayor of San Perdito. Moreover, the possibility that the mentioned changes might not be immediate effects, but rather delayed effects of the ruling of a mayor would indicate, that Varro not only had no influence, but also a bad influence on the unemployment rate and population.

Secondly, by mentioning that the residents of San Perdito were served best if Varro gets reelected, the argument makes the flawed assumption, that a low unemployment rate and a high population are the only factors that play a significant role in determining how well a population is doing. However, it is quite possible that Varro's ruling caused severe trouble for the residents. One can imagine, that Varro did not invest in education, subdued the people, did not respect the constitution, was involved in serious political scandals or harmed the residents of the city in other possible ways that would outbalance the positive impact of a low unemployment rate.

Finally, while a low unemployment rate admittedly usually benefits the residents of a city, the same is not necessarily valid for a high population. High populations might cause house prices to increase as common sense suggests that bigger populations result in a stronger demand in the housing market. This, in turn, usually does at least not benefit all residents of a city, as many of them will have to pay higher rents or higher prices for houses.

In conclusion, the argument is not very convincing as it fails to provide sufficient evidence for the direct cause-and-effect relationship between the unemployment rate and population on the one side, and the ruling mayor on the other side. Moreover, the argument would be more convincing if it provided evidence that a judgment about how well the residents of a city are served can solely be based on the unemployment rate and population.




Thank you so much for your time!

Kevin

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 578
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 6:00 pm
Thanked: 136 times
Followed by:62 members

by KapTeacherEli » Tue Aug 14, 2012 7:38 pm
Hi Kevin,

Great job on this essay! It's a really good example. Your explanations of your points are in depth, thorough, well supported, and well organized. You understood the prompt, and you understood your task, and it shows!

The only thing holding you back from a perfect 6 score is your style, your command of English. No one expects a perfectly styled essay, of course, not in 30 minutes. But there are a few too many errors--such the misused "not only...but also" structure at the end of paragraph 2, and the run-on sentence beginning the third sentence--to rate a 6.

I recommend that you add a minute or two to your proofreading time. It's clear you're utterly in command of the organization and reasoning here! So, you can afford to build another minute or two to scour for punctuation and idiom errors, and make sure your English is as polished as the other aspects of your essay.

Good job!

Regards,
Eli Meyer
Kaplan GMAT Teacher
Cambridge, MA
www.kaptest.com/gmat

ImageImageImage

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 8:57 am
Thanked: 11 times
Followed by:6 members

by Kevinst » Wed Aug 15, 2012 8:40 am
Thank you VERY MUCH, Eli!

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 8:57 am
Thanked: 11 times
Followed by:6 members

by Kevinst » Wed Aug 15, 2012 1:35 pm
KapTeacherEli wrote:Hi Kevin,

But there are a few too many errors--such the misused "not only...but also" structure at the end of paragraph 2, and the run-on sentence beginning the third sentence--to rate a 6.
Eli,

would you mind telling me which run-on sentence you referred to? Don't run-ons usually occur when two independent clauses are connected by a comma? Unfortunately I cannot find the mentioned mistake.

Thank you so much for all your time!

Kevin

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 578
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 6:00 pm
Thanked: 136 times
Followed by:62 members

by KapTeacherEli » Wed Aug 15, 2012 7:29 pm
Secondly, by mentioning that the residents of San Perdito were served best if Varro gets reelected, the argument makes the flawed assumption, that a low unemployment rate and a high population are the only factors that play a significant role in determining how well a population is doing
In this case, the run-on is actually caused by an EXTRA comma, the comma after the word "assumption." Or, arguable, this isn't a run-on, depending on how you read it--it's just an error involving restrictive and non-restrictive clauses. Regardless of your point of view, it's very subtle, but the comma messes up the flow of the sentence!
Eli Meyer
Kaplan GMAT Teacher
Cambridge, MA
www.kaptest.com/gmat

ImageImageImage

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 8:57 am
Thanked: 11 times
Followed by:6 members

by Kevinst » Thu Aug 16, 2012 12:19 pm
KapTeacherEli wrote:
Secondly, by mentioning that the residents of San Perdito were served best if Varro gets reelected, the argument makes the flawed assumption, that a low unemployment rate and a high population are the only factors that play a significant role in determining how well a population is doing
In this case, the run-on is actually caused by an EXTRA comma, the comma after the word "assumption." Or, arguable, this isn't a run-on, depending on how you read it--it's just an error involving restrictive and non-restrictive clauses. Regardless of your point of view, it's very subtle, but the comma messes up the flow of the sentence!
Ahhh! It's about the comma! Got it, Thank you!