Please rate my GRE essay, any tip will be highly appreciated.

[ramo62003]

Hi everyone,

 

I am non-native English speaker. Also, I limited myself to 30 mins.

It is OK to be harsh in your feedback. I still have about 4 weeks and I am trying to improve as much as possible.

 

The prompt: 

"On Balmer Island, where mopeds serve as a popular form of transportation, the population increases to 100,000 during the summer months. To reduce the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians, the town council of Balmer Island should limit the number of mopeds rented by the island's moped rental companies from 50 per day to 25 per day during the summer season. By limiting the number of rentals, the town council will attain the 50 percent annual reduction in moped accidents that was achieved last year on the neighboring island of Seaville, when Seaville's town council enforced similar limits on moped rentals."

 

 

My response:

The letter tries to make a direct connection between the increased number of accidents in Blamer Island and the number of mopeds during the summer, but at the same time, it makes several of unjustified assumptions which make its argument flawed.

 

There no evidence proves that the high number of mopeds during the summer in Blamer Island is the reason behind the high rate of accidents. The author basically made this assumption without giving any supportive data such as a report from the police department prove this direct relationship. The reason could be simply due to the poor designs of the streets in the island, or the lack for a law enforcement traffic. The list of possible causes is endless. Thus, making such an assumption without further explanation is a very weak point in the author's argument.

 

Furthermore, the author in the letter assume that what have worked in the neighboring island will work for the Blamer Island. Despite the fact that this might have a percentage of correctness, the author did not provide any details of the other island. This assumption may hold true only if the other island is very similar to the Blamer. However, the other island might have great designed streets and existence of trained police officers, and the numbers of mopeds is its only problem. Thus, without providing more information about the neighboring island, we cannot assume that what have worked for them will work in the Blamer island.

 

By observing the above unjustified assumptions, we can conclude that the argument makes multiple unwarranted assumptions. Therefore, the author's argument will remain weak and invalid, unless he addresses all of the mentioned assumptions and provide more data and info that proves the direct relationship between the number of accidents and the increased number of mopeds.

 

Best

[sujon]

your writing score is about 4 to 4.5.

you will get lots of help at greplus.com

[ramo62003]

Thanks Sujon for the rating.

Also, any feedback will be highly appreciated.

[widefellow]

Hi everyone,

 

I am non-native English speaker. Also, I limited myself to 30 mins.

It is OK to be harsh in your feedback. I still have about 4 weeks and I am trying to improve as much as possible.

 

The prompt: 

"On Balmer Island, where mopeds serve as a popular form of transportation, the population increases to 100,000 during the summer months. To reduce the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians, the town council of Balmer Island should limit the number of mopeds rented by the island's moped rental companies from 50 per day to 25 per day during the summer season. By limiting the number of rentals, the town council will attain the 50 percent annual reduction in moped accidents that was achieved last year on the neighboring island of Seaville, when Seaville's town council enforced similar limits on moped rentals."

 

 

My response:

The letter tries to make a direct connection between the increased number of accidents in Blamer Island and the number of mopeds during the summer, but at the same time, it makes several of unjustified assumptions which make its argument flawed.

 

There no evidence proves that the high number of mopeds during the summer in Blamer Island is the reason behind the high rate of accidents. The author basically made this assumption without giving any supportive data such as a report from the police department prove this direct relationship. The reason could be simply due to the poor designs of the streets in the island, or the lack for a law enforcement traffic. The list of possible causes is endless. Thus, making such an assumption without further explanation is a very weak point in the author's argument.

 

Furthermore, the author in the letter assume that what have worked in the neighboring island will work for the Blamer Island. Despite the fact that this might have a percentage of correctness, the author did not provide any details of the other island. This assumption may hold true only if the other island is very similar to the Blamer. However, the other island might have great designed streets and existence of trained police officers, and the numbers of mopeds is its only problem. Thus, without providing more information about the neighboring island, we cannot assume that what have worked for them will work in the Blamer island.

 

By observing the above unjustified assumptions, we can conclude that the argument makes multiple unwarranted assumptions. Therefore, the author's argument will remain weak and invalid, unless he addresses all of the mentioned assumptions and provide more data and info that proves the direct relationship between the number of accidents and the increased number of mopeds.

 

Best

 

The major problem of this essay is that it is not fully developed as ETS would like to see. For example, in second paragraph, where you insert the possibilities that "poor designs of the streets in the island, or the lack for a law enforcement traffic" that might in fact cause the increase in number of accidents involving mopeds, you did not elaborate in what way, for instance, "poor designs" cause such increase in accidents. It might seem self-explanatory that, of course poor designs surely lead to chaotic traffic situation and thus an increase in accidents, but remember ETS is not looking for a good "answer" to attack the author's position, but your ability to sustain a position by elaborating your point in details. 

 

I also notice that you wrote quite a bit of statements that are not closely related to the particular argument prompt per se. For example, sentences like "Despite the fact that this might have a percentage of correctness, the author did not provide any details of the other island", and also the entire concluding paragraph are sentences containing not much relevant information to the prompt. 

 

There are some more important logic problems from the author that you might want to include in your essay. For example, what's the purpose of the author saying the town should limit its daily rental from 50 to 25? And will this be effective in controlling the number of mopeds in the streets? 

 

Sorry for being *harsh* and hope this helps.

[ramo62003]

Thanks widefellow for the feedback. I will try to add more supporting details for my argument, and also focus on the important logic problems.

 

I concur with you that these two points are important.

 

Thanks