AWA Essay Review Needed ( Kaplan- CAT Question)

This topic has expert replies
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 5:42 am
The following appeared as part of a letter to the editor of a local newspaper:

"It makes no sense that in most places 15-year-olds are not eligible for their driver's license while people who are far older can retain all of their driving privileges by simply renewing their license. If older drivers can get these renewals, often without having to pass another driving test, then 15-year-olds should be eligible to get a license. Fifteen-year olds typically have much better eyesight, especially at night; much better hand-eye coordination; and much quicker reflexes. They are also less likely to feel confused by unexpected developments or disoriented in unfamiliar surroundings, and they recover from injuries more quickly."

Answer -
Through the argument, the author claims that fifteen year olds should be eligible for obtaining a driver's license. According to the author, if older people can retain their driving privileges by simply renewing their licenses, and do not have to clear another test; the 15 year olds should be made eligible for one too. He also states that the 15 year olds have better eyesight, better co-ordination, and recover more quickly from injuries than the older people.

Though the author's claim may have merit, the author has presented a poorly-reasoned argument, based on questionable premises and assumptions and based solely on the evidences presented above, the argument is not completely invalid.

The primary issue with the argument is with its premises. The premises, the basis of of the argument lack evidentiary support.

Firstly, the author tries to draw a parallel between the experienced drivers(older people ) and 15 year olds, by saying that if the former can retain their driving privileges by simply renewing their licenses, the latter should be made eligible for driver's license too. It is difficult to comprehend what the author implies by saying make 15 year olds eligible . Is he saying issue them a driver's license with/without a test? He fails to consider the fact that the older people have been driving for quite sometime now, and have road sense, and are familiar to the rules of driving, whereas the 15 year olds have never driven a car earlier, it is like comparing apples and oranges. Also, he assumes that one degrades one's driving skills over a period of time, or forgets how to drive or is out of practice, which may not be true, instead one becomes a better driver the more frequently one drives.

Secondly, he highlights the better traits of the 15year olds, like better hand-eye co-ordination, better eyesight, quicker reflexes. Though these are definitely needed for one to be a good driver, but these are not the only ones . 15 year olds,also tend to be more impulsive and aggressive when compared to older people. In case of an accident, or any other scenario, one needs to be calm and composed to take a wise decison, which comes mostly with maturity. The fact that there is an age limit before one is eligble to get a driver's license is evident of the fact the issuing authority doesn't consider 15 year olds to be mature enough to drive on the roads. The author has given no evidence whatsoever to prove that 15 year olds are good/better drivers.

Thus, without any legitimate evidentiary support, the premises of the argument , render the author's conclusion unconvincing.

The secondary issue is with the assumptions that auhtor makes to draw the conclusion.

The very first assumption that the author makes is that 15 year olds know how to drive. He hasn't provided any facts or numbers to support this assumption.Secondly, in his last line, the author says that 15 year olds are more likely to recover from injuries quickly, implying that he assumes that 15 year olds are more accident-prone.If that is the case, it weakens the author conclusion. Thirdly, only good reflexes and better co-ordination are not the only traits needed to be eligible for a driver's license, one ought to know the traffic rules, be familiar with road signs, be responsible for yourself as well as others on the road.

To strengthen the argument, the author should have provided statistics showing that older people who have renewed their licenses without a test, are reckless drivers and more accidetn-prone. He should have also given examples to assert his point that 15 year olds if made eligible for a driver's license would make good drivers. Maybe results of a small study group could have been provide.

Thus, the if the author intends to change the reader's minds, he should restructure his argument, by providing evidences for his premises and support his assumption too.

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

by KapTeacherEli » Sat Aug 31, 2013 12:09 pm
Hi Jeckyll,

This one is a four.

It does a very good job of covering all the bases. You establish many flaws in the author's argument, correctly and with acceptable organization--the experience of older drivers, the fact that there are things other than eyesight and reflexes related to driving, etc. However, the language was very difficult to understand in a lot of places. Make sure what you write is clear and concise, even if that means you are writing significantly less.


I hope this helps!
Eli Meyer
Kaplan GMAT Teacher
Cambridge, MA
www.kaptest.com/gmat

ImageImageImage