JYoung

A recent sales study indicates that consumption of seafood dishes in Bay City restaurants has increased by 30 percent during the past five years. Yet there are no currently operating city restaurants whose specialty is seafood. Moreover, the majority of families in Bay City are two-income families, and a nationwide study has shown that such families eat significantly fewer home-cooked meals than they did a decade ago but at the same time express more concern about healthful eating. Therefore, the new Captain Seafood restaurant that specializes in seafood should be quite popular and profitable. 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. The foundation for the argument presented is weak. Indeed, some of the statistical findings or reports immediately contradict one another, such as; the idea that seafood dishes are going up in consumption, yet household eating rates are dropping, and yet there are no main seafood resturantes in Bay City. In order to evaluate if a new Captian Seafood restaurant would do well in Bay City surveys of public opinion and an understanding of public dietary preferences are needed. The first statistic of the argument should not be a statistic and in fact, should give numbers in order to illustrate a point. The first statisticcites that consumption of seafood dishes in Bay City have gone up percent, however, the starting point of the statistic is not mentioned. Therefore, consumption of seafood could have gone up from an origin of 1 or 0, over the past five years which means either not gone up or relavtively little. Indeed, perhaps instead of citing a proportion, the statistic should give numbers instead, so audiences have a clear understanding of the real growth of seafood consumption. Presenting numbers would be more trustable and hollistic. In regards to the arguments following the mentioning of a national survey, the national survey may not apply to Bay City; therefore, the author’s following arguments may be missleading or incorrect. There is no date or details concerning the nationwide study. Perhaps the survey is old or misconstrune. Indeed, the statement, “such families eat significantly fewer home-cooked meals….but at the same time express more concern about healthful eating,” seems contradictory in logic. Futhermore, whether or not the survey applies to Bay City is not mentioned. A local sturvey of Bay City is required in order to determine if residents are eatting out more. A more local survey would indeed, be more enlightening to the success of a new seafood restaurant. Finally, the question of if residents would go to a specfic seafood restaurant is up for debate; meaning the entire argument made by the author cocerning the success of a new resturante rests on shaky grounds. Assuming the previous statistics are correct and apply to Bay City, whether or not the residents of Bay City find seafood healthly and whether or not a specfic seafood restaurante would do well is unanwsered. If the residents of Bay City do care more about healthly food, knowing if seafood is a healthly food or if the people of Bay City consider seafood to be healthly is important. There could also be missed underlying assumptions critical to understanding future predictions on the dietary preferences and habits of Bay City; for example, are many within the population allergic to fish? Knowing dietary preferences of Bay City is important for making future predictions concerning the success of a restaurante. Furthermore, knowing whether or not the people of Bay City would go to a specfic restaurante is unknown. More information about the restaurante needs to be presented and surveyed for responses amoung the population. For example, questions such as; is the restaurante close to most residents, or is the restaurante clean and attractive are important to ask. There are many more questions to ask before assuming the people of Bay City would go to a specific restaurante. Clearly, the argument presented is not well developed. Although the author means well by presenting both local and national survey information, unfortnately not knowing any information regarding the survey collection process hampers the authors arguments. Indeed, the author also leaves critical questions left unanwsered; such as whether or not the people have a preference for a new seafood restaurante. Without more surveys among the general populace of Bay City the evidence and the conculsions of the author seem inncorrect.

Educators should teach facts only after their students have studied the ideas, trends, and concepts that help explain those facts. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position. Educators should not only teach facts only after their students have studied the ideas, trends, and concepts that help explain those facts. If educators were to follow this recommendation not only would learning be diminished within the class, but outside of the class as well. Although the recommendation attempts to present a recommendation which protects the structure of education, learning by atpyical means and not straightforward conventions can solidfy learning material. Educators should note, learning facts without previous understanding or notions of a topic can be very beneficial to learning. Take for example, studying waves in physics. A student might be able to observe that with a quicker rate of sliding a rope on the ground the troupes of a wave are higher and the period of a wave, smaller than compared to a rope swung not so quickly on the ground. Students therefore, learn to identify quicker rates with higher yields and shorter cycles; an idea that can help students learn the information after or during a presentation of facts. What occurs during a future lecture therefore, is a solid reassurance of the trends an object of study might undergo, and therefore a more deeper understanding of the material and facts. Indeed, engaging with facts before discussion stimulates educational curiousity and demonstrates a deeper knowledge of material already presented as factual. For example, if a student were to practice studying Fibbanica squences after just learning counting principals and patterns the student would learn new material and be challenged in different mannors. A new type of challenge can stimulate a students brian in ways different than simply reviewing a topic then learning the facts. Clearly, there is a great benefit in the learning process for students to learn facts without prior understanding of topics or ideas. In the example given learning the Fibbanica squence in fact, can review core concepts learned prior to studying recurrsion squences. If educators were to only teach in one way, that is study the idea of a topic, or trends and concepts before a fact, indeed, the learning process and potential for a student may be hampered. Since learning facts without prior knowledge requires a new and deeper engagment with material denying an educator the opportunity to encourage educational curiousity discourages students from seeking new educational opportunities and understandings. Furthermore, if an educator only teaches the facts, of that which is discussed in abstract notions, the amount a student can learn is drastically reduced from a student whose educator is eager to teach facts aside from that already mentioned. To encourage educational vigor and spiritedness educators should not teach facts only after their students have studied the ideas, trends, and concepts that help explain those facts. Doing so would short students of the amount they could learn and discourage educational venturism. Indeed, learning facts, perhaps in an abstract sense, before studying ideas, such as a period or troupe, can lead to a strong foundation for future ideas, concepts and indeed, facts.

hi could someone or multiple people give feedback on my recent gre practice essays; it would be much appreciated. as an fyi i turned off the spell check so things might get a bit sloppy.

Alanine, thank you so much for a through review of my essays. I really appreciate it. Let me know if you would like a review for an essay or two and I will be sure to help out!

Formal education tends to restrain our minds and spirits rather than set them free. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There are many different types of education. Some believe a formalized education can be restrain our minds and spirits, while others do not. In this essay, I will take the stance that a more formalized education restrains our minds and spirits to some degrees. Many aspects of formalized education can develop the spirit and mind. Indeed, before arguing further, by formalized education I assume the author means a standardized set of instructions or codes to follow when teaching students in grade ranging from kindergarden to the twelfth grade. This is far different then allowing a student or child to learn from the way of the land, or without instruction or a teacher. Continuing, a formalized education allows students to develop a sense of intution about the world through concepts such as math and arthemic. These concepts allow a student to gain more knowledge about the world by not only informing the student of the basic understandings of the world, thus enhancing the students mind, but also inspiration and opportunity to learn more about world, thus enchancing the student’s spirit. A child without any sense of direction would be very impaired and understand the world in a non-senseical sense without a formalized education. A more abstract critque of the authors stance might be true freedom is not desired within an education. Education would seem to provide the very essence of society by allowing people to communicate, learn, and express ideas. Although the author of the arugment seems to be concerned with freeing the mind and spirit asking why a ‘freeing’ of the mind and spirit is important, is necessary. If there is some normative gain in freeing the mind body and spirit, the gain is overshadowed by the utility of not teaching a formal education. Allowing an individual to have a ‘free’ abstract notion of the world would seem to be the negative result of allowing a non-formalized education to florish within education systems and nations. There are a small percent of individuals who would benefit from a less formalized education. These individuals, to paraphrase Nietzsche, understand the asthetic ideal better than most individuals, but are few in amount. Those who have an asthetic understanding of the world are typically argued to be geniuses – such as Albert Enstein or Alexander the Great and provide a great benefit to socities and nations. These benefits, however, require formalized understandings of the world, which can only come from formalized educations. For this reason and those outlined above, yes, a formalized education does restrain a person’s mind and spirit to some degree, however, the benefit of restrain outweighs the negatives of freedom. Indeed, for the few who do learn or would like to learn in abstract notions to ‘free the mind and spirit’ there are always opportuities outside of school. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi alanine, thanks so much for offering to support! I'll attach the essays in two replies, just so they fit. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the Palean people. Recently, however, archaeologists discovered such a "Palean" basket in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea. The Brim River is very deep and broad, and so the ancient Paleans could have crossed it only by boat, and no Palean boats have been found. Thus it follows that the so-called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean. 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. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ There are many flaws in the authors conculsion that, “the so-called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean.” Many of the authors arguments are poorly constructed and contain logical fallancies. For example, simply because excavators have not found Palean boats does not mean the Palean people never made a boat. Futhermore, other modes of transportation could have existed across the Brim River. Indeed, a full excavation and search of the Brim River and Lithos seems necessary in order to make the conculsion stated by the author. Many different explanations could explain the emergence of the “Palean” basket in Lithos. Jumping to the conculsion therefore, that simply because a Palean basket was found in Lithos means the basket was not “Palean” is therefore, flawed. Excavators could have failed to find the boats or other means of transportation across the Brim River. Further evidence of no possible means of transportation across the Brim River would seem to be necessary in order to prove the “Palean”baskets were not unique to Palean people. If no evidence is found after a documented and legitmate search of river and both villages, then perhaps the baskets could be non-uniquely Palean. However, if means of transportation are found, then the authors argument would be under the strong critque that the Palean people could have moved their baskets to Lithos. Along with the arguments regarding transportation, the author of the argument must prove, no methods of trade or communication existed between Lithos or Palea. If a method of trade existed between the villiages then the baskets could still be unique to Palea, that is made in Palea, by Palean people, but existing in Lithos as a sold commodity. This would again, defy the logic of the arguer as trade can allow objects to move and still contain unique properties across a space. In order to prove trade could not have existed between the village of Palea and Lithos the author should prove no foreign traders visited both villages or state evidence to prove no trade existed between both villages, or multiple. Finally, to suggest the baskets, even though found in Lithos are not Palean is also flawed by the fact that a Palean person could have taught the village of Lithos how to make a basket. In this sense, the detail of the basket would have still be unquie or original to Palean culture, however shared across cultures. To make the argument the basket is unquie to the Palean people, however, the author must first prove the craftsmanship of the basket of Palean origin. In this sense the author needs some sort of verification that the baskets were craftable by the Palean people and no other people, or some other strong evidence, other than location and “immediate vicinity”to support the claim that the baskets are Palean. In essence, there are critical flaws in the arugers logic and therefore conculsion. From the beginning of aruging, the author does not even prove the baskets are unquie to the Palean people. Furthermore, the author fails to prove the baskets, if unquie to the Palean people, were not sold or transported across the Brim river or some other means of transportation. For these reasons, the authors argument is flawed and requires more evidence to prove the baskets are unquie to the Palean people. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi, I am wondering if someone will review or critique my practice GRE issue and argument essays. I thank you in advance -- They are attached below. Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the Palean people.docx