Professional Documents
Culture Documents
GRE Argument Model Essays PDF
GRE Argument Model Essays PDF
An essay analyzing an Argument is easier to compose than one analyzing an Issue. This is
because, in the case of an Argument, you have some concrete facts and recommendations in front of
you to analyze, and do not have to start from scratch.
An argument passage will consist of some facts, some research findings or some opinions of experts
followed by some conclusions or recommendations by the author of the argument.
You must recognize each of these and must differentiate among them. You should write a critique of
only the last, namely the conclusions or recommendations. You should not try to question the
correctness or accuracy of the first three.
In narrating each Argument, the question setters would have deliberately
incorporated two or three logical flaws in it. Their intention is to test whether you are
capable of spotting these flaws and commenting on them logically.
An analysis of the pool of 174 Arguments for GRE, released by Educational Testing Service, reveals
that the types of logical flaws that are repeatedly encountered are JUST 14 in number. It is these 14
flaws which are incorporated in different contexts in different Argument topics.
The types of these 14 logical flaws are:
1. Concluding that because Action A caused Result X a few years ago, a similar action A now will
cause a similar result X.
While analyzing an argument containing this flaw, you should point out that the relevant
circumstances might have changed significantly in the last few years, and that the same action may not
produce the same result now. In the context of the given narration, you should enumerate some of the
possible ways in which the circumstances might have changed in the intervening years.
2. Comparing the achievement record of Company A in a particular year (say, 1995) with a better
achievement record of Company B in some other year (say, 2001), and concluding that Company B is
therefore more efficiently run than Company A.
While analyzing such an argument, you could point out that the year 1995 was perhaps bad for all
companies, and that Company B, if it had existed then, might have fared equally badly, or even worse,
than Company A in that year. You should also point out that, if the achievement record of Company A
for 2001 is available, it may perhaps be seen that Company A had done even better than Company B in
2001, and is therefore the more efficient of the two. You could also state that these two companies may
be in two totally different types of industries and are not comparable at all on the basis of any single
common parameter. You may give instances of difference in the nature of these two companies.
3. Concluding that, because Institution A (a college, university, school, town council, state, a
magazine, a shop or a supermarket) had taken Action X (such as introducing a new syllabus, a new tax,
a new regulation, introducing a new feature, reducing the price, stocking a new item etc.) successfully,
Institution B should also take the same Action X to achieve the same result.
You should point out that conditions are perhaps different in the two institutions, and an action
which was successful in one may not prove to be equally successful in the other. In the context of the
given narration, you should enumerate a few possible differences in characteristics between the two
institutions.
4. Comparing the efficiency of two organizations A and B (such as two shops, two hospitals, two
schools etc.), on the basis of just a single parameter (such as turnover, or the number of patients who
had died, the number of prizes it won in a certain athletic competition etc.) and concluding that one is
more efficient than the other.
You should point out that a single parameter cannot be used to compare the overall relative
efficiencies of two institutions, and that other factors (such as profit per employee, profit per dollar
invested, or the number of terminally ill patients who had been admitted, academic success of the
students etc.) must also be taken into consideration.
5. Trying to apply the result of a statistical study in a limited area to a much wider area or,
conversely, trying to apply the result of a nationwide statistical study to a limited local area. A
1
variation of this is the extrapolation of the results of a study over a short period (say, six months) as
valid for a much longer period (such as a decade or a century).
In the former cases, you should point out that conditions in the local area may be significantly
different from what is prevalent in the wider geographical area or vice versa, and that, therefore, the
results of a particular statistical study may not be true in both. In the latter case, you should point out
how conditions relevant to the conclusion may have changed over a period over a period of time. In the
context of the given narration, you should enumerate a few possible differences in conditions that may
arise.
6. Extrapolating the result of a statistical study on a small sample to a much bigger population, or to
a totally unrelated group (for example, the result of a medical experiment on rats being applied without
modification to human beings).
You should point out that the sample that was studied was perhaps not typical of the general
population, and that what was true of this biased sample may not be true of the total population. In the
context of the given narration, you can enumerate a few possible ways in which the sample may differ
from the general population.
7. Concluding from a percentage difference (such as 5% or 95%), but without the base figure, that
the increase/decrease was either high or low.
You should point out that an increase of 90% over a base figure of 100 will be much less than an
increase of only 10% over a base figure of 10,000. Therefore, without knowing the base figure, it is not
possible to judge whether the increase/decrease was high or low. You can cite such figures (whether
100, 1000, 10,000 or a million) in the context of the given narration.
8. Concluding that, because Action A will increase the sales revenue of a company, it will also
increase its profit. Or, conversely, a decrease in sales turnover will result in a decrease in profit.
You should point out that an increase in sales revenue need not always be attended by an increase
in profit, or vice versa. The steps taken to increase the turnover, such as opening new branches,
appointing new staff, incurring additional advertisement expenditure, increased transportation,
increased interest on capital employed etc., may sometimes result in a decrease in overall profit.
Similarly, austerity measures which will save considerable unnecessary expenditure may sometimes
result in a reduction in turnover even while increasing the net profit.
9. Arriving at a certain conclusion on the basis of the opinion expressed by a high percentage (such
as 90%) of those who responded to a survey.
You should ask the questions: What was the total population? What percentage among them were
approached with a questionnaire or were interviewed? And what percent among these actually
responded?
If only 10% of a total population were approached, and only 10% among them responded, then the
opinion in favor of the proposed conclusion is that of only 1% of the total population, and it cannot be
considered to be reflective of that of the whole population.
10. Arriving at a conclusion on the basis of the opinion of, or experiments on, many, several, or a
number of persons or subjects, without actually quantifying these numbers.
You must point out that these vague adjectives may mean any number (say, from 20 to 20,000) and
that, unless they are specifically quantified, it is not possible to come to any reliable conclusion.
11. Concluding that because Event B followed Event A, Event B must have been caused by Event A.
(This is known as a causal relationship between A and B).
You must point out that what caused Event B might have no relationship at all to Event A, but was
something totally different. In the context of the given narration, you can enumerate some of the other
probable causes for Event B.
12. Arriving at a conclusion on the assumption that the reported number (of a particular illness such
as headache, an accident etc.) is the same as the actual number.
You must point out that not everyone (who had that illness or who had been involved in an accident)
might have reported for treatment at a hospital. In the context of the given narration, you may give
possible reasons for their action.
13. Concluding that only one of Event A or Event B can happen under the given circumstances,
without considering the possibility that both events can happen simultaneously.
2
Format 2
Para 1:
Para 2:
Discuss the link (or the absence of it) between the conclusion and the evidence presented in support
of it.
Para 3:
Show three deficiencies in the reasoning of the argument.
Para 4:
Show how each of the three deficiencies could be plugged by stating the missing assumptions.
Format 3
Para 1:
Restate the given argument and say that it has two/three/four flaws.
Para 2:
Point out the first flaw and show it could be plugged if only a particular assumption (which is
missing) is made.
Para 3:
Point out the second flaw, and show it could be plugged only if another specific assumption (which is
missing) is made).
Para 4:
Point out the third flaw, and show it could be plugged only if another specific assumption (which is
missing) is made).
Para 5:
Summarize your essay with the statement that, because these assumptions have not been stated,
the given argument is weak.
Do not use strong words such as foolish, idiotic or mad to describe a conclusion in the given
argument. Remember that logical flaws are deliberately built into the conclusions for you to notice and
comment upon. The use of words such as illogical and unfounded are quite adequate to describe these
logical flaws.
Wind up your essay with a concluding paragraph as in the model essays below. If you have time, you
4
Each Analysis of an Argument essay will be scored on a 0 to 6 scale according to the criteria below.
SCORE 6 - OUTSTANDING
A 6-paper presents a cogent, well-articulated critique of the argument and demonstrates mastery of
the elements of effective writing.
A typical paper in this category
* clearly identifies important features of the argument and analyzes them insightfully
* develops ideas cogently, organizes them logically, and connects them with clear transitions
* effectively supports the main points of the critique
* demonstrates control of language, including diction and sentence variety
* demonstrates felicity with the conventions of standard written English but may have minor flaws
SCORE 5 - STRONG
A 5-paper presents a well-developed critique of the argument and demonstrates good control of the
elements of effective writing.
A typical paper in this category
* clearly identifies important features of the argument and analyzes them in a generally thoughtful
way
* develops ideas clearly, organizes them logically, and connects them with appropriate transitions
* sensibly supports the main points of the critique
* demonstrates control of language, including diction and sentence variety
* demonstrates felicity with the conventions of standard written English but may have occasional
flaws.
SCORE 4 - ADEQUATE
A 4-paper presents a competent critique of the argument and demonstrates adequate control of the
elements of writing.
A typical paper in this category
* identifies and analyzes important features of the argument
* develops and organizes ideas satisfactorily but may not connect them with transitions
* supports the main points of the critique
* demonstrates sufficient control of language to convey ideas with reasonable clarity
* generally follows the conventions of standard written English but may have flaws
SCORE 3 - LIMITED
A 3-paper demonstrates some competence in its analysis of the argument and in its control of the
elements of writing but is plainly flawed.
A typical paper in this category exhibits one or more of the following characteristics:
* does not identify or analyze most of the important features of the argument, although some
analysis of the argument is present
* mainly analyzes tangential or irrelevant matters, or exhibits poor reasoning
* is limited in the logical development and organization of ideas
* offers support of little relevance and value for points of the critique
* does not convey meaning clearly
* contains occasional major errors or frequent minor errors in grammar, usage, or mechanics
SCORE 2 - SERIOUSLY FLAWED
A 2-paper demonstrates serious weaknesses in analytical writing skills.
A typical paper in this category exhibits one or more of the following characteristics:
* does not present a critique based on logical analysis, but may instead present the writers own
views on the subject
* does not develop ideas, or is disorganized and illogical
* provides little, if any, relevant or reasonable support
5
We give below an essay on a different argument which was awarded the score of 6.
ARGUMENT: The following appeared as part of an article in a daily newspaper.
The computerized onboard warning system that will be installed in commercial airlines will
virtually solve the problem of midair plane collisions. One planes warning system can receive signals
from anothers transponder - a radio that signals a planes course - in order to determine the likelihood
of a collision and recommend evasive action
Essay that was awarded the score 6 - Outstanding
The argument that the new warning system will virtually solve the
problem of midair plane collisions omits some important concerns that
must be addressed to substantiate the argument.
The statement that follows the description of what this warning system
will do simply describes the system and how it operates. This alone does
not constitute a logical argument in favor of the warning system, and it
certainly does not provide support or proof of the main argument.
Most conspicuously, the argument does not address the cause of the
problem of midair plane collisions, the use of the system by pilots and
flight specialists, or who is involved in the midair plane collisions.
First, the argument assumes that the cause of the problem is that the
planes courses, the likelihood of collisions, and actions to avoid
collisions are presently unknown or inaccurate. In a weak attempt to
support its claim, the argument describes a system that makes all of
these things accurately known. But if the cause of the problem of midair
plane collisions is that pilots are not paying attention to their
computer systems or flight operations, the warning system will not solve
the collision problem.
Second, the argument does not address the interface between individuals and the system and how this will affect the warning systems
objective of obliterating the problem of collisions. If the pilot or
flight specialist does not conform to what the warning system suggests,
midair collisions will not be avoided.
Finally, if planes other than commercial airlines are involved in the
collisions, the problem of the collisions cannot be solved by a warning
system that will not be installed on non-commercial airlines. The
argument also does not address what would happen in the event that the
warning system collapses, falls, or does not work properly.
Because the argument leaves out several key issues, it is not sound or
persuasive. If it included the items discussed above instead of solely
explaining what the system supposedly does, the argument would have been
more thorough and convincing.
10
12
ANALYSIS OF ARGUMENTS
MODEL ESSAYS
Each of the following model essays is a first draft by the author and was composed within the given
time limit of 30 minutes, so that it is truly representative of the type of essay that a bright candidate is
expected to write for deserving the highest score of 6.
You can obviously not compose essays before you sit for your GRE on each of the 174 topics given, nor
can you memorize all the following essays and reproduce them in the test.
On the other hand, you should not just read the following essays a few times and then imagine that you
will have no difficulty in composing a similar essay in the test hall if the topic is posed to you. You should
write essays of your own on at least 15 of the given topics before you sit for your GRE. Composing an essay
is a difficult art, and the examination hall should not be the place where you compose a GRE essay of your
own for the first time.
Remember that there is a time limit of 30 minutes for composing your essay. It is only by writing a
few essays on your own within this time limit that you can assess beforehand how many words you will
be able to write or type in the test hall. A length of 350 to 400 words would be the optimum.
(In the case of the first few model essays below, we have first indicated the types of flaws in the
given argument. You can take them as the guidance for reviewing the subsequent arguments.)
1. Natures Way chain of stores
The following appeared in a memorandum written by the vice president of Natures Way, a chain of
stores selling health food and other health-related products. Previous experience has shown that our
stores are most profitable in areas where residents are highly concerned with leading healthy lives. We
should therefore build our next new store in Plainsville, which has many such residents. Plainsville
merchants report that sales of running shoes and exercise clothing are at all-time highs. The local health
club, which nearly closed five years ago due to lack of business, has more members than ever, and the
weight training and aerobics classes are always full. We can even anticipate a new generation of customers:
Plainsvilles school-children are required to participate in a fitness for life program, which emphasizes
the benefits of regular exercise at an early age.
(The basic flaw in the given argument is the use of vague phrases such as many such residents, alltime highs, and more members than ever which do not have any specific quantitative meaning. You
should build your essay on this fundamental defect.)
Any proposal for a new commercial venture must concentrate on its financial viability, and
must contain specific projections of anticipated turnover, cost of goods, gross profit, overhead
expenses and net profit. The memorandum of the Vice President is silent on each of these
points.
Firstly, for any such venture to be viable, there ought to be a break-even turnover which
the Vice President of any leading chain stores must be aware of. His memorandum does not
contain a single specific figure, but talks generally of many such residents, all-time highs
and more members than ever, which do not have any numerical certainty.
Secondly, the memorandum does not even indicate whether Plainsville is a small or a large
village, or a small or a large town. It has no information about its population. If the total
population of Plainsville is 1000 (of whom only about 600 are likely to be adults), the fact that
many of them are concerned about leading healthy lives may not justify the establishment of
a new store of Natures Way there. On the other hand, if the population of Plainsville is above
100,000, the proposal would look more rosy.
Thirdly, the fact that sales of running shoes and exercise clothing in Painsville are all-time
highs does not also strengthen the argument, because such all-time high may be just $500 in
the whole year, the figure in the previous years having been even less.
Fourthly, the memorandum says that the local health club, which nearly closed down five
years ago, has more members than ever. This vague figure of more members than ever may
be anything like 50 or 1000. Obviously, the proposal will have some validity if the number is
1000, but will have no justification at all if the number is only 50.
Fifthly, the memorandum talks of the business that will be generated by school children,
again without giving any information about their number. If there is only one school in
Plainsville with less than 200 students, then the proposal will not be justified. If it has a
number of schools with a total enrollment of 10,000, there will be some merit in the proposal.
13
14
20
26
36
49