MGMAT CAT2 essay - Request to review

This topic has expert replies
Legendary Member
Posts: 641
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2012 3:52 pm
Thanked: 11 times
Followed by:8 members

MGMAT CAT2 essay - Request to review

by gmattesttaker2 » Sun Aug 26, 2012 9:03 pm
Hello,

I was just wondering if you can please grade my essay. This is from MGMAT CAT3. Thank you very much for your valuable time and help.

Best Regards,
Sri


ESSAY QUESTION:


The following appeared as part of a campaign statement for Velazquez, who is seeking election as alderman in the town of Barchester:

"Under Police Commissioner Draco, the city of Spartanburg began jailing people for committing petty crimes such as littering, shoplifting, and spraying graffiti. Criminals in Spartanburg must have understood that lawlessness would no longer be tolerated, because the following year Spartanburg saw a 20% drop in violent crimes such as homicide. Our town should learn from Commissioner Draco's success, and begin a large-scale crackdown on petty crime."

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.


My Response:

In this argument for Velazquez, a comparision is made between the town of Barchester and the city of Spartanburg. The argument states that since Police Commissioner Draco began jailing people for petty crimes, there was drop in violent crimes. Here, a comparision is made between punishing people for petty crimes and it's impact on violent crimes. It is not clear how jailing people who commit petty crimes could impact people who commit more serious and violent crimes.

The argument might be implying that by punishing petty criminals and jailing them, they are prevented from committing more serious and violent crimes like homicide, slayings etc. However, this is not very clear from the argument. If the argument presented some proof or statistics that petty criminals if unpunished moved onto more serious crimes, then this argument might hold more ground. Usually, petty crimes esp. littering and spraying graffiti are commited by vandals and mischief mongers. Whereas crimes like homicide are committed by violent criminals. In-fact, meting out severe punishment for an act like spraying graffiti which sometimes are done by rebellious youngsters might make them despise the system even more and might even turn them into more serious offenders.

Another flaw here is that a comparision is made between the city of Spartanburg and the town of Barchester. Since the argument itself is stating that these are 2 different geographic areas, namely a city and a town, it is not clear how the same "formula" that was used in the city of Spartanburg can be applied to the town of Barchester. They might have totally different types of crimes and people who are perpetrating them. Besides given the fact that one is a city and the other is a town, the demographics and socio-economic conditions might vary vastly.

Also, the argument does not state the extent of petty crimes committed especially in Barchester. If Barchester has a very small instance of petty crimes and a very large extent of violent crimes, then handing out such severe punishment for acts like spraying graffiti and littering might not be a great idea. A better solution would be to educate people about cleanliness and respecting public propery. Since people often shoplift thinking that it's a prank or realising that it's not severe, stores can warn people of the severity of shoplifting and of the ramifications involved. This might be a better approach since it is proactive rather than reactive. Besides, it also takes the burden off of law enforcement and helps them to focus on and prevent more serious and violent crimes.

Hence, though the argument cites an example wherein jailing people for petty crimes resulted in a drop in violent crimes, though just by 20%, unless the argument presents more evidence it is hard to find a connection between these two. Besides, just because this worked in one city does not mean that this will work in another city, let alone a town. This argument can be improved by presenting solid facts and evidence and proof of how this approach has been success in other cities as well.

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

by KapTeacherEli » Thu Aug 30, 2012 7:56 pm
Hi gmattesttaker,

I'd give this a 5! You really do very well on the depth of your logic, your reasoning, and your structure. However, your writing is tough to understandl you have some verb errors, repetitiveness, and occasional awkwardness in many of your sentences. This excerpt from your first paragraph:
The argument states that since Police Commissioner Draco began jailing people for petty crimes, there was drop in violent crimes. Here, a comparision is made between punishing people for petty crimes and it's impact on violent crimes
Has a verb tense erro (there was) and a missing article (there was a drop). Also, note you repeat the mention of petty crimes and violent crimes, back to back in the same sentences.

Here is an example of the same content, but a little more concise and clear:
The argument cites an increase in arrests for petty crimes under Commissioner Draco. The argument also mentions a decrease in violent crime, which is implied to be the direct result of those arrests.
Hope this helps!
Eli Meyer
Kaplan GMAT Teacher
Cambridge, MA
www.kaptest.com/gmat

ImageImageImage

Legendary Member
Posts: 641
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2012 3:52 pm
Thanked: 11 times
Followed by:8 members

by gmattesttaker2 » Thu Aug 30, 2012 10:08 pm
KapTeacherEli wrote:Hi gmattesttaker,

I'd give this a 5! You really do very well on the depth of your logic, your reasoning, and your structure. However, your writing is tough to understandl you have some verb errors, repetitiveness, and occasional awkwardness in many of your sentences. This excerpt from your first paragraph:
The argument states that since Police Commissioner Draco began jailing people for petty crimes, there was drop in violent crimes. Here, a comparision is made between punishing people for petty crimes and it's impact on violent crimes
Has a verb tense erro (there was) and a missing article (there was a drop). Also, note you repeat the mention of petty crimes and violent crimes, back to back in the same sentences.

Here is an example of the same content, but a little more concise and clear:
The argument cites an increase in arrests for petty crimes under Commissioner Draco. The argument also mentions a decrease in violent crime, which is implied to be the direct result of those arrests.
Hope this helps!
Hello Eli,

Thank you very much for taking time to review my essay and for your great feedback. I will work on these errors. Thanks again for all your help.

Best Regards,
Sri