First Four Years that Montoya Has Served AWA GMAT Sample

First Four Years that Montoya Has Served AWA GMAT Sample is an argumentative essay topic. GMAT analytical writing assessment examines the writing skills of a candidate through an essay. In this AWA GMAT Sample, the candidate needs to write points that bring out the flaws and weak assumptions in the given argument. The best way to prepare for GMAT AWA is to practice from GMAT AWA practice papers. It is important for challenging and task-oriented candidates to present their answers in a well-organized and planned manner. The GMAT AWA essay needs to ensure that candidates can present their ideas efficiently.
In the AWA GMAT sample essay, candidates must provide evidence and discuss their thoughts on the topic. They must use persuasive evidence against the topic. In addition, candidates should try to convince the readers by describing the different figures and facts of the scenario. Candidates, however, need to understand that writing the essay for GMAT AWA Essay requires them to follow a definite structure that would enable organized writing. The following structure for the AWA GMAT Sample including five important paragraphs can be considered appropriate. To increase the GMAT AWA score, practicing from GMAT analytical writing practice papers is necessary.

Introduction: Candidates need to first explain the topic of the essay given, and clearly state how well this is reasoned. The overview of the passage needs to be discussed in the introduction by the candidates.
Paragraph 1: In this paragraph, candidates must put forward the facts stated in the passage. They can also question the validity of the passage and explain them with reasons. This paragraph should include all the key points that can be discussed in the coming paragraphs.
Paragraph 2: This paragraph needs to include the second reason for the stated opinion of the candidate. Candidates can mention how San Perdito has changed and is not the same as it was 4 years back. Candidates can also include examples. With the help of the example and argument, it is shown that the point of view is wrong and inconsistent.
Final paragraph: This paragraph should highlight the passage. Candidates can mention the flaws provided by the author and evidence to prove that. They can also mention what would have been different and create a discussion.
Conclusion: The conclusion reminds the reader and students of the title of the article and includes arguments and counter-arguments with examples to support and disprove the candidates' views. Here is a summary of the whole article. The word ‘finally’ emphasizes on conclusion. It is briefed with an increase in abilities like communication skills and linguistic talents.

Based on the structure and content of the GMAT release document, the best way is taken to explain the topic by considering the following response strategies, appreciating positive actions, and ignoring negative ones as much as possible:

Instead of analyzing and exploring an argument that criticizes the writer's statement, a characteristic feature is chosen that is maintained throughout the length of the article.
The entire article gives relevance and uniqueness to the readers by providing reasons and illustrations.
Strong declarative or assertive statements are created with active language and statements of cause, reasons, and effect.
The supporting statements are formatted and described well, briefed with two or three sentences, and concluded the article with a strong point.

Topic: The following appeared in the editorial section of a local newspaper:

“In the first four years that Montoya has served as mayor of the city of San Perdito, the population has decreased and the unemployment rate has increased. Two businesses have closed for each new business that has opened. Under Varro, who served as mayor for four years before Montoya, the unemployment rate decreased and the population increased. Clearly, the residents of San Perdito would be best served if they voted Montoya out of the office and reelected Varro.”

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.

Sample Essay:

The author in the argument says that the residents of San Perdito would be best served by reelecting Varro instead of Montoya. However the argument does have few flaws. It does not provide a reason which indicates how the residents will be served better by Varro than Montoya. The argument also assumes thatunemplyment has increased in Montoya’s time as a mayor. Also, the argument does not provide a concrete reasoning as to how Montoya is responsible for the closure of businesses and the increase in the employment rate. There are a number of flaws in this argument and the reasoning does not stand good.

Firstly, the argument is distorted. It assumes that the economy of San Perdito is the same as it was four years ago. There is no information about the overall changes in the economy. There is a possibility that the economic rate was better four years ago as the unemployment rate was better. The country’s unemployment rate directly depends on the country’s economy, which sequentially depends on the mayor of the city and various other factors. If the economy would perform badly at the time of Varro the unemployment rate could be the worst. We do not know that for sure. It would be rather unfair to reach any decision before studying the details about the economic condition of the country.

Also, one more major flaws of this argument is the comparison of population data. Without absolute value, it is impossible to foretell the right person responsible for this. One of the many possible reasons might be the outcome of the service provided in the ruling of Varro. This would be the reflection of the service of the mayor before, and the result of Montoya’s service would reflect after four years after his own service. It is evident that the facts present in the argument are misleading to reach at any conclusion. These claims cannot be seen as a full proof. It would have been much more clearer if the argument mentioned the services of Varro that decreased unemployment and increased the population rather than the services offered by any other mayor. Only after that it would have been wise to conclude any decision.

Secondly, the argument claims that during the period of Montoya two businesses have closed for each business that has opened. It fails to provide information about which businesses have closed and which have started in Montoya’s time as a mayor. This cannot be enough explanation to reelect Varro and evict Montoya. The new businesses could possibly be beneficial for the economy of the country in the long term. And it might be possible that the businesses that shut down were not doing any good for the residents of the country anyway would have been closed soon. However, this could be a good signal. With the advanced management measures and newly developed technologies, the businesses can efficiently increase the operation and production. Therefore this shouldn't come as a shock that what the two businesses couldn’t achieve before, now one business can effectively achieve that.

Moreover the unemployment rate and population cannot be the only two factors that determine the capability of the mayor. More standards should have been involved to measure the mayor’s ability, for example, education, safety and security, hygiene, cleanliness, etc. It is possible that in the ruling period both the mayors might have focused on different aspects of the country. Providing any judgement solely on the basis of unemployment rate and population is unfair.

However, there is no specific evidence of what happened during the ruling period of Varro. Without evaluating any certain value, it is imprudent to conclude that Mr Varro was a better candidate than Mr Montoya. The argument is disputed and flawed. It would have been great if the author provided all detailed and sufficient information about the services of both the mayors. Without the significant data the argument remains open to debate. In conclusion, the argument failed to provide the supporting facts and evidence that proved that the citizens of the country made a wrong choice by electing Montoya.

Suggested GMAT AWA Essays

SHARE ON FACEBOOK SHARE ON TWITTER

First Four Years that Montoya Has Served AWA GMAT Sample

Fees Structure

Comments

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWS LETTER