Hello, can an expert critique my essay?
My thoughts:
1) I felt like I rushed this essay a little bit. I spent the first 10 minutes making an outline.
2) I could have analyzed the conclusion more and attacked it. I felt like I was attacking the premises more.
3) I tried to follow a template I learned here on BTG
Please let me know your thoughts on how to improve my writing/analysis
-Gordon
Prompt: Corporations should look to the city of Helios when seeking new business opportunities or a new location. Even in the recent recession, Helio's unemployment rate was lower than the regional average. It is the industrial center of the region, and historically it has provided more than its share of the region's manufacturing jobs. In addition, Helios is attempting to expand its economic base by attracting companies that focus on research and development of innovative technologies.
The author of this passage concludes that corporations should look to the city of Helios when seeking new business opportunities or a new location. The author then attempts to prove his conclusion by stating Helios's unemployment statistics, locational benefits, historical data, and future research. However, the author makes several faulty assumptions when he concluded his argument. First, the author assumes that corporations have no other cities to look for when seeking new business or locations. Second, the author cites historical data, and assumes that the trend in the strong job market of Helios will continue. Lastly, the author made a flawed assumption by mentioning that Helios attempts to expand its economic base, but never guarantees that the action will be committed or happen. From these assumptions, the author concludes a poor argument
The first assumption that the author makes is that Helios is the only city that coporations can look to for new business opportunities or a new location. This assumption is flawed because there can be numerous other cities that can provide the same if not better new business opportunities or a new location. The author assumes that Helios is one of a kind, and corporations cannot get the same experience from a different city. This of course is ludicrous. What if Helio was a port based city, that really specialized in a certain business such as fishing or international shipping. The author cannot gaurantee that all corporations will have the same positive experience in Helios. From this the author's argument is flawed.
The second assumption that the author makes is that unemployment rate at Helios is still acceptable by the industries standard. Helios' unemployment rate may indeed be lower than the regional average, but if the regional average was 95% unemployment and the unemployment rate of Helios was 93% the employment rate must not better than some other corporations. There may be other corporations that have an unemployment rate of 70%, but the unemployment statistic of Helios is only compared with the regional average. There are no hard numbers to compare against, which is why the argument is further flawed.
The last assumption that the author makes is that Helios is attempting to expand its economic base. The author's assumption is that Helios will definitely go through with this action. There is no guarantee that Helios will definitely expand its economic base for the betterment of companies who focus on research and development innovative technologies. Helios may very well not go through with the plan, or even so the companies wishing to relocate to Helios may not have a need for research and development innovative technologies.
The author concludes that Corporations should consider the city of Helios when seeking new business opportunities or a new location. The author makes several faulty assumptions which he draws his conclusion from. Even though the author makes some valid points, he or she can strengthen the conclusion by addressing the flawed assumptions in the preceeding paragraphs.
My thoughts:
1) I felt like I rushed this essay a little bit. I spent the first 10 minutes making an outline.
2) I could have analyzed the conclusion more and attacked it. I felt like I was attacking the premises more.
3) I tried to follow a template I learned here on BTG
Please let me know your thoughts on how to improve my writing/analysis
-Gordon
Prompt: Corporations should look to the city of Helios when seeking new business opportunities or a new location. Even in the recent recession, Helio's unemployment rate was lower than the regional average. It is the industrial center of the region, and historically it has provided more than its share of the region's manufacturing jobs. In addition, Helios is attempting to expand its economic base by attracting companies that focus on research and development of innovative technologies.
The author of this passage concludes that corporations should look to the city of Helios when seeking new business opportunities or a new location. The author then attempts to prove his conclusion by stating Helios's unemployment statistics, locational benefits, historical data, and future research. However, the author makes several faulty assumptions when he concluded his argument. First, the author assumes that corporations have no other cities to look for when seeking new business or locations. Second, the author cites historical data, and assumes that the trend in the strong job market of Helios will continue. Lastly, the author made a flawed assumption by mentioning that Helios attempts to expand its economic base, but never guarantees that the action will be committed or happen. From these assumptions, the author concludes a poor argument
The first assumption that the author makes is that Helios is the only city that coporations can look to for new business opportunities or a new location. This assumption is flawed because there can be numerous other cities that can provide the same if not better new business opportunities or a new location. The author assumes that Helios is one of a kind, and corporations cannot get the same experience from a different city. This of course is ludicrous. What if Helio was a port based city, that really specialized in a certain business such as fishing or international shipping. The author cannot gaurantee that all corporations will have the same positive experience in Helios. From this the author's argument is flawed.
The second assumption that the author makes is that unemployment rate at Helios is still acceptable by the industries standard. Helios' unemployment rate may indeed be lower than the regional average, but if the regional average was 95% unemployment and the unemployment rate of Helios was 93% the employment rate must not better than some other corporations. There may be other corporations that have an unemployment rate of 70%, but the unemployment statistic of Helios is only compared with the regional average. There are no hard numbers to compare against, which is why the argument is further flawed.
The last assumption that the author makes is that Helios is attempting to expand its economic base. The author's assumption is that Helios will definitely go through with this action. There is no guarantee that Helios will definitely expand its economic base for the betterment of companies who focus on research and development innovative technologies. Helios may very well not go through with the plan, or even so the companies wishing to relocate to Helios may not have a need for research and development innovative technologies.
The author concludes that Corporations should consider the city of Helios when seeking new business opportunities or a new location. The author makes several faulty assumptions which he draws his conclusion from. Even though the author makes some valid points, he or she can strengthen the conclusion by addressing the flawed assumptions in the preceeding paragraphs.
