Writing Feedback / Installing lights to reduce accidents. GRE Analyze an argument. Feel free to comment. [5]

"More and more cities and towns are installing red light cameras to catch red light runners in the act. In 2008 alone, red light running accounted for 762 fatal crashes in the United States and 137,000 injuries. A study conducted by the Federal Highway Administration attributed a 25 percent reduction in T-bone accidents at intersections to the installation of red light cameras. Because people fail to voluntarily honor the law, these traffic cameras are essential in enforcing these laws and protecting public safety."

Discuss the merits of the preceding argument. Analyze the evidence used as well as the general reasoning. Present points that would strengthen the argument or challenge it.

It is commendable that that authorities are trying to curtail the frequency of accidents and reduce the possibilty of pernicious accidents by the employment of "safety cameras". However, the decision of the authority is based on flawed assumptions and nebulous statistics.

First of all, the author assumes that since the presence of traffic lights at accidents at intersections, they would work equally well with traffic lights and thus will be effective in reducing red-light running. It should be pointed out that just because something works in one case does not mean that it would necessarily work well in another case. If such is the case, and the assumption is not fully warranted of justified, then it is probable that the presence of cameras will have meager effect on the number and frequency of red-light running. If the author can provide a description of how a camera may reduce the number of accidents at intersections, then only may the assumption be properly extraploated into a proper justification.

Another problem with the argument is that the statistics are a bit too vague and broad. For example, it is possible that the density of accidents is not uniform throughtout the US. But rather, it may be possible that the accidents are more concentrated in certain areas than in others. For example, more red light running accidents may occur in california than in Kentucky or Ohio. If this is true, than the employment of cameras in areas where such rankling incidents rarely occur may have little effect. Also, the statisitcs are a bit outdated (The numbers are from the year 2008), and things may have changed overtime. Perhaps the red light running effects are probably not as severe as before. The author can make a more convincing argument by providing more details about the statistics, as well providing numbers over a range of years in order to show that red light running is being worse or stagnant.

Another assumption that the author makes is the fact that the red light running incidents are the fault of the people, in other words, the cause of red light running is not stated explicitly in the passage. It may be entirely possible that inclement weather may make it difficult for people to react to red-lights at intersections on time. If this is true, then the authoritires may require a different approach. Or it may be possible that the fines for red light running are simply too low, hence people may not be too bothered about paying fines, and then sink back into recidivism once payments are done.

Writing Feedback / Petition to University administration/ GRE analyze [6]

The following appeared in a petition presented by Classen University students to the school's administration.

"The Purpose of higher education is to prepare students for the future, but Classen students are at a serious disadvantage in the competition for post-college employment due to the University's burden-some breadth requirements. Classen's job placement rate is substantially lower than placement rates of many top-ranked schools. Classen students would be more attractive to employers if they had more time to tak advanced courses in their speiclaty, rather than being required to spend fifteen percent of their time at Classen taking courses outside their subject area. We demand, therefore, that the University avandon or drastically cut back on its breadth requirements."

The Author's intention to increase post-college employment rates is commendable. However, the author's argument is lacking in the fact that his/her analysis is a bit narrow, focusing simply on the curriculum's breadth requirement while not focusing at all on other factors.

The Author mentions that Classen's Breadth requirement is to be blamed for the lack of employment. The Author mentions fifteen percent. Fifteen Percent of what? How much is fifteen percent? ten days? twenty days? A month? There is an ambiguity about how much pressure students face. It may be possible that fifteen percent is not much in terms of the actual time. And thus does not prove to be an encumberance, implying that specialized courses can still be taken. And if this is true, curriculum cannot be blamed. If the author can provide concrete data about how many credits hours students have to spend on major and non-major courses, only then can a detailed analysis be made.

The Author mentions that students from Classen would be more marketable if they were able to take more specialized courses in their major. However, the author does not provide a holistic scrutiny of the merits of the students itself. It may be possible that students from Classen simply do not have enough out of class, real-life experience. This may arise due to a lack of extra curriculur activities available at Classen, or the inability of the administration to place students in proper internships. Employers may be reluctant to hire graduates who have too much speicalized knowlegde but little to no job or management experience. If the author can prove, or at least show some statistics as to the practical management skills of the Classen Graduates

The Author also mentions that Classen has a lower post-college employment compared to many top-ranked schools. Classen's reputation in comparison to such schools is not mentioned. It may also be possible that top-ranked schools may have a higher post-college employment rate simply because of the reputation of the schools. Since no timeline for the data is given. It may possilbe the Classen had a higher employment rate before, and due to some economic downturn, Employers are inclined to hire less people, and thus predisposed to hire graduates from more prestigious schools.

Unless the author provides a more detailed description of Classen Student portfolios, it cannot be conclusively remarked that the school curriculum needs to be overhauled. And thus the author's recommendation cannot be considered.

Writing Feedback / GRE ; Advancing our understanding of the world [2]

"Teach Your Children to Question Whatever They are taught". Some of the
greatest breakthroughs in all fields, in all facets took place due to the
questioning of conventional and accepted wisdom, for example: the
heliocentricity of the solar system.

Accepted Wisdom is correct in mose cases and can be expreimented over and
over again for their validity. And in a lot of cases, Accepted wisdom goes a
long way to elucidate how the human milieu and the extant nature works, for
example: Newton's Laws to explain how objects move or why tides are higher
when the moon is visible. In fact, it is the universal infalliblity of
conventional wisdom which has led to more facts, and thus a better
understanding of our surroundings

However, as mentioned in the opening paragraph, some of humanity's greatest
breakthorughs were achieved simply because some people had the audacity to
question what was seemingly incontrovertible. These people, through
curiosity, deidcation and talent have not only challenged what was
universally accepted, but rather have gone through great lengths to define
the limits of conventional wisdom, concommitantly bringing about new data
and theories about nature and advancing out knowledge bank. These are the
breakthroughs with which humans have advanced the understanding of the world

For example, The Anciet Greeks believed in the geocentricity of the solar
system, and this knowledge has propagated for centuries up till the middle
ages. Then, Galileo and Copernicus, two famous astronomers made a huge
number of observations and calculations. They concluded that it was the
Earth that moved around the sun, not the other way around. Galileo and
Copernicus were both excommunicated by the Catholic church for what was
deemed heresy at that time. Centuries later when more advanced tools were
developed for better solar observation led to the vindication of these men.

Another example is Einstein. Einstein challenged Newton's Laws, proving that
these laws break down at high speeds. Newton's laws were accepted as
universal (and valid at all times). Einstein's work led to the development
of gravity as something that was completely different from what physicists
had previously known and accepted as. Einstein was shunned for his work on
relativity and time dilation. Today, Einstein's work allows us to have a
penetrating understanding of the universe we live in. In fact, Einstein's
work on general relativity allows us to have more accurate GPS systems.

Therefore, in the end. Accepted wisdom allows us to make a better sense of
the world. But it should be understood that even conventional wisom has its
own limitations, and thus need to be challenged to in order refine our
understanding of how our world works.

Writing Feedback / Equal Oppurtunity And Parity in Pay. GRE Analyze an issue [3]

Sorry I've been away for quite a while, I just needed a break to prevent my brain from burning out.

"Equal opportunity means parity in pay. Everyone should not earn the same amount of money, but it's ridiculous to see an athlete earning tens of millions of dollars in a single year while the average household income is slightly more than $50,000."

Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the previous statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take.
In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement may or may not hold true and explain
how those considerations shape your position.

I partially agree with the given statement. I believe that it is right to assume and state that equal oppurtunity should mean equal pay,
However that equal pay is only acceptable under certain conditions, and fail if external factors are not properly considered, which I
will elaborate in my argument.

It is congenial to say that equal oppurtunity should mean equal, or at least similiar, wages. Since Jobs of equal stature, regardless
of where or within what entity the post is, usually entails prerequisite of knowledge or skill, equal responsibilty, and so on. Since the
burden entailed is the same, the wage should be the same as well. Also, it is justifiable that oppurtunities which are not equal should
differ in payment as well. Since the burden of two different posts may be completely different. If this is the case, then people having
two different oppurtunities should be paid differently.

However, equal opputunity does not necessarily mean that the parity in payment should always be maintained. Let us suppose there
are two people in the same position in a company. Both people have the same qualifications and shoulder the same burden. However,
If one person out-performs the other, or does overtime, or a combination of both, then the more productive person deserves a better pay
for bringing in contributing more to the body he/she works for, even though both people have the same oppurtunity.

Another reason why parity cannot sometimes be maintained is due to the fact that different commodities and services have different demands.
It is ubiquitous that some things simply sell far better than others. As such, it is illogical to simply assert that people of similar stature, regardless

of who or what they work for, should receive equal pay simply due to the burden. Cellphones may sell better than caviar.And therefore, it is

justifiable that workers in the cellphone industry earn more than the caviar firm/industry counterparts.

Considering the example given in the statement and using the argument from the aforementioned paragraph, it is perfectly acceptable that a
sportsman earns way more than the average household. A sportsman gets paid a lot by sponsors, simply because sponsors are able to sell
their entertainment so well. A sportsman gets a number of product endorsement and advertisement offers, which generate additional revenue.
For example - The eyes of the world are on players whenever an important football match is going on, and anyone who watches TV or uses the

internet can see that players get contracted for advertisement. Whereas the breadwinner from an average household simply works at a single job,
probably something that hundreds of people work at as well, has no product endorsement or anything similar.

Therefore, all in all, it is not equal oppurtunity that should equate to equal pay. But rather, pay is something that is more dependent on being

able to sell, being able to contribute and above all being productive. If two entities are equal in all these regards, only then may it be correct

to say the qual oppurtunity is tantamount to parity in payment.

Writing Feedback / GRE - 'Correlation between monitoring and productivity of the employees' [6]

"In the six months that I have been watching the employees, their productivity has increased by over 12 percent. Therefore, my recommendation is that the employees either be watched by, or think that they are watched by, an outside evaluator at all times from this point on."

Discuss the merits of the preceding argument. Analyze the evidence used as well as the general reasoning. Present points that would strengthen the argument or make it more compelling.

In the given argument, the author mentions that he/she has monitored the employees, and the productivity of the employees has increased over a period of time. And the author argues that the employees should be moitored, or at least make the employees think they are monitored in order to increase or maintain productivity.

The authors arguement, and his assumption(s) may be right. From the given arguement, it can be surmised that the author assumes the productivity of the employees has increased simply beacuse they were being monitored, and hence may under some duress work harder. This can be true in certain conditions. For example, the company or organisation may be laying off employees for some reason, like a declining economy, or the replacement of workers with machinery or some other (possibly cheaper) alternative. If such were the case, then it is possible that most workers may be more assiduous in their assigned tasks, from hopes that they will be noticed by the administration and not be laid off instead of someone else. And the authors argument would definitely be strenghthened.

However, since no details are mentioned about the organisation or the firm, any factor can eventuate increased productivity. One factor can be better or improved technology, which in turn may allow workers to complete more work per time and hence improve productivity. Another factor may be that the organsiation has announced increased remuneration or benefits for industrious people. This in turn may have motivated the workers, leading to increased productivity. If these factors are true, it would undermine the author's reasoning and arguement.

Hence, it is understood that the author may be right. But without any details, in cannot be fully judged as to whether the authors arguement is vaild or not

ps jkjeremy I've revised some of my previous analysis, hope this essay is a step forward
dumi, I'm not sure whether you've read my "Analyze an Argument" responses before, but I hope this lives up to your standards.

Writing Feedback / Bearing arms and violence in a country - GRE Analyze an issue [2]

"The right to bear arms is not the direct cause of the level of violence in a country."

Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the previous statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement may or may not hold true and explain how those considerations shape your position.

Given a number of considerable mass-murders and shootouts, or crime in general, such as the Virginia Tech Shootout in 2002, Or the Norway mass murders or the Connecticut school shootout;

one may be inclined to think that there is a correlation between the availability of arms and the legal allowance to bear arms, and the level of violence in a country or a region. I believe This is

partially true, and I believe that he root cause of violence is not arms bearing.

One may argue about the validity of the relationship between violence levels and the allowance of bearing arms: citizens in a country can be allowed to bear arms for a number of reasons:

self-defense, hunting, etc. However, it should be pointed out that one is allowed to bear arms only for speicific reasons, and reasons which bring no harm (at least directly). However, if such

rights go unchecked and and proper meausres are not taken as to who should be allowed to carry a gun or any other weapon, it is inevitable that dangerous objects can occassionally fall in

the hands of wrong people, or lunatics who have no proper sense as to who to use an arm on. This may in turn lead to the aforementioned tragic events, and thus may increased violence levels.

However, it should be noted that such tragic events(i.e. mass shootouts) are few and far between. And also, it should be noted that people who cause such tragedy are not normal, mentally healthy

people. No, if one keeps up with the news, it is frequently revealed that such people usually have some unjustified vendetta against a particular group, or were not mentally sound, but rather had a

distorted view of their surroundings. Or let us consider the occassional shootout. Deaths happen beacuse of the usage of guns. However, the problem goes beyond the availability of guns.

Crime can be commonplace due to a number of reasons: Lack of education, a failing economy, an established organisation that committs illegal acts on a frequenct basis, etc. And therefore, the

right to bear arms pays a somewhat cursory role in violence levels. Let us consider the US, for example. The law allows people to bear arms in self defence. Despite that crime levels are significantly

low in more propserous cities or regions, and people do not usually bear arms. On the other hand, if we consider some less affluent cities, which has one of the worst crime levels in the nation, Detroit does suffer from

a number of gang wars, poor economy and a poor educational system.

Therefore, in consideration of the arguement made, the prompt made is somewhat correct, guns lead to more violence. However, the right to bear arms is not a direct cause of violence but rather a somewhat indirect cause of violence in a nation.

ps jkjeremy, you can contact me at dragonquest_1993@hotmail.com

Writing Feedback / GRE Analyze Issue;Best way to teach- praise positive actions and ignore negative ones [7]

Prompt:
"The best way to teach is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones"

Response:
Teaching is much more than the mere repetition or paraphrasing of known facts.
A proper way to teach is to make a student, or student, body interested in whatever is being taught. To teach properly is to make the learning process memorable. Now, I agree that the best way to teach is to praise positive actions. However, Negative actions cannot simply be ignored. Rather the source of the proverbial weed must be identified and rooted quickly.

Let us discuss why it is important to praise positive actions. First, praising positive action of a student (or students) points out what should be done in a class. Repeated praises for such actions, can often lead to other students picking up that habit and Such positive actions help maintain the flow of the teaching and learning process. Some actions, may reinforce important points and augment the teaching process. Given the cumulative effect of these three outcomes, an environment can be conducine for learning. Let us take a common action which occurs during teaching: Questions. Questions and answers are an important way of reinforcing and summarizing important points. Any student who asks pertinent questions should be praised, so that some points are repeated in the answer. Also, the habit of questioning may spread quickly to other people, resulting in an increasing freuqency of questioning and may even cause a mutual classroom discussion, a most effective way to learn.

Now onto negative actions. Simply ignoring negative actions is not the key to diminishing their effects. Why? If a negative action is simply ignored and nothing else is done about it, the root of negative actions may pervade the environment. If this happens, a negative action may be repeated over and over again, with increasing frequency. This may disrupt the flow of the teaching process. Secondly, Other people may pick it up quickly and the negative action may have a worse effect. If not dealt with celerity, and entire 'class' can become completely degenerate and uncontrollable. Therefore, as I have explained, the mere existence of negative actions may cause very little to be conveyed and the entire process will become a fiasco. For example, in the 8th grade, some students used to misbehave during Language Classes. Intitially, the teahcer chose to overlook the mischief caused by some of the rowdier students. However, chatting and small time affrontery qucikly developed into clamorous actions: Stomping on the floor, throwing pens and sharp objects, and the like. And the teacher was simply unable to stop such catastrophe at any time.

Instead of ignoring wanton actions, such actions must be panned and the root of it all qucikly taken care of. This will ensure that nothing bad happens.

Therefore, in conlcusion, I only agree with the first half of the recommendation. Good actions must be praised in order to create a more conduvine learning and teaching environment and bad actions must be taken care of quickly in order to prevent future uproars.

Writing Feedback / GRE Analyze an argument; Child-rearing traditions in Tertia [6]

The following appeared in an article written by Dr. Karp, an anthropologist.

"Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia and
concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village
rather than by their own biological parents. However, my recent interviews with children
living in the group of islands that includes Tertia show that these children spend much more
time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village. This
research of mine proves that Dr. Field's conclusion about Tertian village culture is invalid
and thus that the observation-centered approach to studying cultures is invalid as well. The
interview-centered method that my team of graduate students is currently using in Tertia will
establish a much more accurate understanding of child-rearing traditions there and in other
island cultures."

Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the
argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.

In the arguement, Dr. Karp argues that Dr.Field's research and the method of observation research are both invalid. This argument is based on the premise that during one of Dr. Karp's interviews, the children spent more time talking about their biological parents, and it is this single statement that acts as the foundation for Dr. Karp's arguments and conclusions and it is this point that matters in the entire argument.

Now, Dr. Karp's argument may be valid and his conclusions logical. However, what the given argument lacks is the details of his analysis, and in particular the minutinae of the conversation he or his graduate students may have had with the children of Tertia. In fact, it is the details of this conversation that would reveal as to whether Dr. Karp is right or wrong. Dr. Karp's argument may have been strengthened if he mentioned that most of the conversation was about how the children were brought up. However, since the argument does not have the slightest inkling of the nature of the discourse students had with the native children, the conversation could have been about anything. It could have been about who each children live with, or it could be anything not pertinent to being brought up. If such is the case, Then the conversation and interview approach simply fails in extracting the relevant data and information.

If the interview-centered approach involves talking mostly about things other than how the children were brought up, then the single column supporting Dr. Karp's entire arguemnt simply becomes non-existence. If this is so, then the claim made about the invalidity of the original study is a complete farce and the assertion the the interview-apporach is superior remains uncorroborated.

Writing Feedback / GRE Analytic Writing; Surest indicator of a Great Nation [7]

Claim: The surest indicator of a great nation must be the achievements of its
rulers, artists, or scientists.

Reason: Great achievements by a nation's rulers, artists, or scientists will
ensure a good life for the majority of that nation's people.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or
disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.

It is true that the greatness of a nation can be measured by the achievement of
its leaders, artists and painters. However, this statement is not true in a number
of cases. There are other indicators of the greatness of a nation, for example the economy,
or the condition of the population.

Let us consider the the claim. It is true that the achievements of a leader, or
an artist or a scientist can make a nation great. In fact, some of the greatest
nations on earth, for example Japan or America or France. Such nations do boast
a good number of Nobel Laureates, Artists who have been recognazied and remembered
for decades, sometimes centuries. Some of the greatest leaders in history have
established laws, or established sets of laws, which form the basis of modern laws
in nations, or have inspired great ideoligies among countless people.

Now let us turn to why such achievements are not the only indicators of greatness.
The state or condition of the general population is a factor that can affect how
a nation is perceived. For example, the literacy rate of a nation or the living
standards of families. A nation can boast a huge number of achievements of
prominent people. But it is wrong to simply assume that the literacy rate or
living standards of people is in direct proportion with the number of achievements.
. There may be a huge rcognition for prominent people, but the population may not be very well off, and hance that nation cannot be considered grate.For example, let us consider India. India does boast a number of Prize winners in

various science competitions, and a Nobel laureate in literature. India had great leaders like Gandhi and Nehru. Yet 268 million
people in India live without elelctricity and only 21 million people live in developed cities.
developed cities. Given this possibilty, the claim is weakened.

On to the second point. The state of the economy is a huge factor in determining
the greatness of a nation. A nation may not boast a large number of overachievers
but yet may have a strong economy and prosperous tranqulity. Let us consider china.
While the Chinese Communist Party is somewhat less than respectable, and the fact that there may not be as many recognized people as compared to Europe or America, China has the second

largest economy in the world (China Jostled Japan to 3rd place some time ago).
This is due to the fact that the Chinese population in general is very industrious. This in
turn allowed China to turn from nothing into a nation to be recknoed with, within a two decades after
some inital impetus.

Considering the two arguements, the reader may be able to understand that althought the
achievements of leaders, artist and scientists may indicate how great a nation is. Achievements
are not the only factor determining how great or prosperous a nation is. There are other factors
beyond the number of achievements, and all factors of a nation must be considered in order to truly determine whether
a nation is great or not.

P.S jkjeremy if you're reading this, I hope it is a slight improvement compared to my previous writings.

Writing Feedback / Nations should pass laws in order to preserve nature; GRE/ Analyze an issue [6]

Prompt:
"Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their
natural state."

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree
with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address
the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your
position.

Response:
It is understood that eradication of wilderness, for example: deforestation or
hunting of animals can sometimes be the inevitable by product of developmet of
a nation. However, given the recent situation of the climate, and nature in general,
I agree with the statement Nations should pass laws in order to preserve any remaining
wilderness in their natural state.

A reader may ask, Why? There are several answers. First and foremost, the
existence of rare and nearly extinct species. Whenever trees are cut down in
order to provide lumber or fuel, or when people hunt too much for food or sport
countless animal and mammal species can be killed or driven away. Because there
is no ecosystem to derive its food from, or there are no living spaces for such
species. There have been several instances where man-made factors have led to
extensive outward migration or extinction of species. For example, when Poachers
well allowed to hunt freely in the savannah which led to the severe depletion of
tiger population in Africa.

The second reason is that by not protecting wilderness, companies and other similar
entities may be tempted clear out an entire forest. Now, people may argue that
the space is needed to build industries and homes for exapnding population. The
Rebuttal to this arguement is that The disadvantages far outweigh the advantages
in this case. If trees were cleared out, the roots of the trees which are left over
would no longer hold the soil together. Near riverlands, soil may be washed away
by the river and be contaminated, or the deposition of soil at the riverbanks
may cause floods, as is the case in India. On hillsides and mountains, the
lack of trees may cause landslidesand avalanches. On the other hand,
building infrasturcture upon cleared out lands may lead to more man made
pollution. Which would not only harm wildlife but also us humans as well.

And my third point is: Wilderness areas can provide a huge source of tourism revenue.
Certain countries, especially countries in asia, rely on the revenue generated
by wildlife tourism to run economies. Now, clearing out such area could possibly
reduce such revenue on a considerable scale. Now, it can be argued that the
development that follows may cover and exceed tourism revenues. The answer to this is,
There is no guarantee that the development would guarantee the cover-up of such
lossess, and thus there would be no such problems. The ability of the development
may be affected by various factors.

Therefore, and considering both sides of the arguement, I believe that state laws
should enact laws that protect the wilderness. As I have shown with the aforementioned
arguements, nations would, quite certainly, benefit from the protection of the
wilderness.