GMAT ANALYSIS OF AN ARGUMENT SAMPLE ESSAYS

 The GMAT Analytical Writing Assessment (AWA) consists of one 30-minute writing task: the Analysis of an Argument. For this task, you will be given a short argument written by another person and asked to evaluate its logic and explain how well the argument supports its conclusion.

GMAT ANALYSIS OF AN ARGUMENT SAMPLE ESSAYS

Here is a sample prompt for the Analysis of an Argument task:

```

The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a local newspaper:

"Over the past year, our town has seen a significant increase in the number of motor vehicle accidents involving pedestrians. This is largely due to the fact that many of our roads are narrow and do not have sidewalks. To address this problem, the town council should consider constructing new roads with wider lanes and sidewalks. This would make it safer for pedestrians and reduce the number of accidents."

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.

```

To begin your essay, you might start by stating that the argument is suggesting that the town council should construct new roads with wider lanes and sidewalks in order to reduce the number of accidents involving pedestrians. You could then discuss what specific evidence is needed in order to evaluate the argument. For example, you might point out that the argument does not provide any evidence to support the claim that the increase in accidents is due to the lack of sidewalks on the roads. Without this evidence, it is not clear that the proposed solution of constructing new roads with wider lanes and sidewalks would actually address the problem.

In order to strengthen the argument, the author could provide evidence that shows a correlation between the number of accidents involving pedestrians and the lack of sidewalks on the roads. For example, the author could present data that shows that towns with a higher number of sidewalks have a lower number of pedestrian accidents. This would support the claim that constructing new roads with wider lanes and sidewalks would reduce the number of accidents involving pedestrians.

On the other hand, evidence could also be presented that weakens the argument. For example, the author could provide data that shows that the increase in accidents involving pedestrians is not due to the lack of sidewalks on the roads, but is instead due to other factors such as an increase in the number of pedestrians or a decrease in the number of traffic police. In this case, the proposed solution of constructing new roads with wider lanes and sidewalks would not address the problem and may not be effective in reducing the number of accidents.

Overall, the specific evidence that is needed to evaluate the argument is data that shows the relationship between the number of accidents involving pedestrians and the lack of sidewalks on the roads. This evidence could either strengthen the argument by supporting the claim that constructing new roads with wider lanes and sidewalks would reduce the number of accidents, or it could weaken the argument by showing that the increase in accidents is due to other factors.