The GMAT AWA measures the candidate’s ability to think critically and to communicate ideas through an essay. The GMAT exam measures basic verbal, mathematical, and analytical writing skills. The GMAT AWA test scores depend on how well the candidates write and present their thoughts. This essay sample talks about the quality of life at City L. Candidates can practice similar topics in the GMAT AWA practice paper.
Topic: The following appeared as part of an article in a magazine on lifestyles:
“Two years ago, City L was listed 14th in an annual survey that ranks cities according to the quality of life that can be enjoyed by those living in them. This information will enable people who are moving to the state in which City L is located to confidently identify one place, at least, where schools are good, housing is affordable, people are friendly, the environment is safe, and the arts flourish.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
Answer:
The argument claims that city L has been recorded at 14th number in the yearly review two years ago. This survey ranks every city of the urban communities dependent on the quality of life enjoyed by the residents living in those cities. Further, the argument expresses that this specific data from the survey will help individuals to recognize city L as a city of good schools, friendly people, affordable houses, a safe environment, and finally flourishing arts. In this argument, the author has reached the resolution with the support of weak assumptions. The author manipulates the current realities and passes on a twisted perspective on the circumstance. Consequently, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.
First of all, the author specifies that the survey was conducted two years ago. It is obvious in the argument whether city L is still at the 14 number on the list or not. The facts might demonstrate that two years prior, the quality of life in city L was pleasant, yet one should not assume that after two years, the quality would be something similar. It may very well be conceivable that the current circumstance of city L isn't fair and has descended because of economic factors like inflation, pricing theories, etc. Two years is a very long time, and it is convincing to recognize numerous progressions inside that timeframe. Hence, relying completely on a survey done two years ago could never be useful to any individual who is moving in the state. The argument would have been much more clear if the author had referred to the current day or recent survey of the city ranking.
Also, check:
Second, not all surveys are correct and adequate. There are numerous individuals who incorrectly answer the questions asked to them. Subsequently, in this specific argument, as the survey was given by the individuals living in city L, it is very clear that the residents will praise their own city. Thus, residents who have been interviewed may have lied in the survey about the quality of life they are living.
Also, the points which have been referenced in the argument like good schools, friendly people, affordable houses, a safe environment, and flourishing arts consistently change from time to time. Hence, one should not rely upon these characteristics to identify the city in the state.
This was another frail suspicion in the argument. Without convincing answers to the inquiry, one is left with the perception that the argument is more of wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence. The author in this article has considered a survey that has not been conducted recently and has utilized it to improve city L's quality of life. The survey doesn't determine the process of the survey, the survey that was analyzed, and the different boundaries that were taken into account to evaluate the cities. Hence the argument should be enhanced with the above data to make it more strong.
Comments