This is the structure I follow broadly-
Para 1: Summary of the arguement and my understanding of it.
Para 2: A standard para I use in every essay as para 2.
Para 3: Point one, usually a flawed assumption, with an example.
Para 4: Point 2, another flaw, with an example.
Para 5: Another point comprising of all the other flaws, mentioned without examples.
Para 6: Ways to strengthen the arguement.
Para 7 : standard conclusion.
I finish all this in 20 minutes. Now I don't know whether I should merge para 6 with the respective points raised in para 3 and 4, or keep it as a seperate para. Please help, I have my exam on monday, and I am not entirely confident of my standing in AWAs.
Kindly rate the essay below.
AWA ESSAYS: Analyze Argument
ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in a proposal for a high school's annual fundraising event:
"In order to earn the most money for supplemental school programs, we will have larger and more thrilling rides at this year's School Fair, including a ferris wheel that is twice as tall as last year's ferris wheel. In addition, the game vendors will award more expensive prizes and the food stalls will showcase a variety of upscale international dishes. As a result, we will be able to charge a higher entrance fee and the dollar amount we earn via our commission on the vendors' revenues will be higher than it was last year."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
YOUR RESPONSE:
The arguement presented above suggests that the fundraisers will be able to earn more money for the supplemental school programs by having more thrilling and larger rides (such as a Ferris wheel twice as large as the one used last year), and by giving away expensive prizes through game vendors and by having upscale international dishes on the food stalls. The author believes that the above mentioned attractions will allow the fundraisers to charge a higher entrance fee, and the dollar amount earned via the commission on vendors' revenue will also be higher.
Though at first glance the arguement seems legitimitate, and even coherent, upon closer scrutiny the fundamental flaws in its architectural structure becomes apparent.
The primary defect in the arguement is that the author assumes that the increased entrance fee will have no impact on the number of visitors. He fails to take into account the fact that the visitors to the even may be price sensitive, and may get discouraged by the increased entrance fee. Fewer visitors in turn will lead to a lower revenue for all the vendors and the fundraisers. This is counter productive.
Secondarily, the author does not throw any light on the costs involved in getting larger, more thrilling rides, upscale food stalls and expensive prizes. These new attractions obviously cost a lot more and will in turn affect the total earnings from the fundraiser. For example, it is possible that the new twice as large Ferris wheel is very expensive to transport to the venue, and eats into the revenues immensely.
Thirdly, the author fails to provide any supporting evidence that shows the preference of the consumers towards larger and more thrilling rides. It is possible that a large number of visitors to the event are under age teens who are not allowed on these allegedly more thrilling rides.
Despite its apparent flaws the arguement is not entirely baseless, the author can strengthen it by providing evidence, such as results of the surveys conducted last year which suggest that visitors will not mind paying extra to experience larger rides, or that the event will attract more visitors if the food stalls offer upscale international cuisine, or that the increase in revenue expected from giving away more expensive gifts at game stalls will be sufficient to cover the very cost of those expensive gifts.
With these new additions the arguement will be more coherent and a majority of its logical flaws will be corrected, without these, it is rather unconvincing.
10 minutes remaining.
Para 1: Summary of the arguement and my understanding of it.
Para 2: A standard para I use in every essay as para 2.
Para 3: Point one, usually a flawed assumption, with an example.
Para 4: Point 2, another flaw, with an example.
Para 5: Another point comprising of all the other flaws, mentioned without examples.
Para 6: Ways to strengthen the arguement.
Para 7 : standard conclusion.
I finish all this in 20 minutes. Now I don't know whether I should merge para 6 with the respective points raised in para 3 and 4, or keep it as a seperate para. Please help, I have my exam on monday, and I am not entirely confident of my standing in AWAs.
Kindly rate the essay below.
AWA ESSAYS: Analyze Argument
ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in a proposal for a high school's annual fundraising event:
"In order to earn the most money for supplemental school programs, we will have larger and more thrilling rides at this year's School Fair, including a ferris wheel that is twice as tall as last year's ferris wheel. In addition, the game vendors will award more expensive prizes and the food stalls will showcase a variety of upscale international dishes. As a result, we will be able to charge a higher entrance fee and the dollar amount we earn via our commission on the vendors' revenues will be higher than it was last year."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
YOUR RESPONSE:
The arguement presented above suggests that the fundraisers will be able to earn more money for the supplemental school programs by having more thrilling and larger rides (such as a Ferris wheel twice as large as the one used last year), and by giving away expensive prizes through game vendors and by having upscale international dishes on the food stalls. The author believes that the above mentioned attractions will allow the fundraisers to charge a higher entrance fee, and the dollar amount earned via the commission on vendors' revenue will also be higher.
Though at first glance the arguement seems legitimitate, and even coherent, upon closer scrutiny the fundamental flaws in its architectural structure becomes apparent.
The primary defect in the arguement is that the author assumes that the increased entrance fee will have no impact on the number of visitors. He fails to take into account the fact that the visitors to the even may be price sensitive, and may get discouraged by the increased entrance fee. Fewer visitors in turn will lead to a lower revenue for all the vendors and the fundraisers. This is counter productive.
Secondarily, the author does not throw any light on the costs involved in getting larger, more thrilling rides, upscale food stalls and expensive prizes. These new attractions obviously cost a lot more and will in turn affect the total earnings from the fundraiser. For example, it is possible that the new twice as large Ferris wheel is very expensive to transport to the venue, and eats into the revenues immensely.
Thirdly, the author fails to provide any supporting evidence that shows the preference of the consumers towards larger and more thrilling rides. It is possible that a large number of visitors to the event are under age teens who are not allowed on these allegedly more thrilling rides.
Despite its apparent flaws the arguement is not entirely baseless, the author can strengthen it by providing evidence, such as results of the surveys conducted last year which suggest that visitors will not mind paying extra to experience larger rides, or that the event will attract more visitors if the food stalls offer upscale international cuisine, or that the increase in revenue expected from giving away more expensive gifts at game stalls will be sufficient to cover the very cost of those expensive gifts.
With these new additions the arguement will be more coherent and a majority of its logical flaws will be corrected, without these, it is rather unconvincing.
10 minutes remaining.
