Homes in the northeastern United States, where winters are typically cold, have traditionally used oil as their major fuel for heating. Last year that region experienced twenty days with below-average temperatures, and local weather forecasters throughout the region predict that this weather pattern will continue for several more years. Furthermore, many new homes have been built in this region during the past year. Because of these developments, we predict an increased demand for heating oil and recommend investment in Consolidated Industries, one of whose major business operations is the retail sale of home heating oil.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the prediction and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the prediction.
According to the above memo, the author insists increasing demand for heating oil in the particular region with the support of several grounds. At first glance, this argument seems to be somewhat convincing, but further reflection reveals that the author failed to render strong proof for the argument. Accordingly, to make a proper judgment, we need to fling a question which can clearly elucidate the validity of insistence.
To begin with, mentioning that most residents have conventionally utilized oil for heating in this region, the memo presumes that they will consistently use oil as their main resources for heating after five years. But today, there are many kinds of efficient heating techniques rather than the oil system. So, Will the residents use oil-heating system for 5 years? Many possibilities like switching their system from the oil system to electronic or carrying heat from recent power plant can undermine the memos assertion. Then, this argument will be invalid. However, people are inclined to retain their own system for the reasons why people aren’t pecunious for changing or people are accustomed to using the oil system. Then, the memos assertion will be intensified.
Furthermore, we can throw an inquiry about population growth of region that undergirds authors insistent. In this memo, prediction of increasing of residents can be extrapolated by newly built residence, but this lack of proof can lead the argument invalid. To assess this supposition, we should give a question: Is there any other evidence that can anneal anticipation that populace population will rise? If other statics or material can support this presumption, then, the author's opinion will be reinforced. If not, it will lose their clarity.
Last but not least, we can pose a doubt about weather prediction which the memo purports as this winter will be colder than past, it will last for several years. This forecast has the same tendency with the above prediction of increasing of residents. They conjecture trend of weather during the upcoming 5 years by just data of one year. Their presumption is based on deficient grounds. And this supposition has quite a risk in that if the weather is warmer than they expected, they will lose lots of money. So, we should know the answer to a question: Do other evidence that can support weather forecast exists? If the author has enough proof like statics by the national weather service center, it will intensify their argument. Otherwise, they will lose their validity
To sum up, the author may not necessarily be wrong to assert that if the company should resume production of alpaca overcoat. But, the argument has several basic weak points that cannot be overlooked easily and the conclusion is not enough strong to convince the readers. Therefore, the speaker’s assertion needs more scrutiny to undergird it. To bolster the argument, these investigations should encompass more conclusive above questions.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/following-appeared…
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 27 15
No. of Words: 479 350
No. of Characters: 2422 1500
No. of Different Words: 242 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.678 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.056 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.651 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 179 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 131 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 96 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 62 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.741 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.749 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.704 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.257 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.458 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.078 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 251, Rule ID: MANY_KINDS_OF[1]
Message: Did you mean 'efficients'?
Suggestion: efficients
...ars. But today, there are many kinds of efficient heating techniques rather than the oil ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 507, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'memos'' or 'memo's'?
Suggestion: memos'; memo's
...om recent power plant can undermine the memos assertion. Then, this argument will be ...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 739, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'memos'' or 'memo's'?
Suggestion: memos'; memo's
...omed to using the oil system. Then, the memos assertion will be intensified. Furth...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 476, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...can support this presumption, then, the authors opinion will be reinforced. If not, it ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, but, first, furthermore, however, if, look, may, so, then, therefore, to begin with, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 28.0 12.9520958084 216% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 42.0 28.8173652695 146% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 54.0 55.5748502994 97% => OK
Nominalization: 30.0 16.3942115768 183% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2507.0 2260.96107784 111% => OK
No of words: 478.0 441.139720559 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.24476987448 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67581127817 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77032081881 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 243.0 204.123752495 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.508368200837 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 758.7 705.55239521 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 16.0 4.96107784431 323% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 8.0 4.22255489022 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 19.7664670659 132% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.8167820214 57.8364921388 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.4230769231 119.503703932 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.3846153846 23.324526521 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.11538461538 5.70786347227 72% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.13594156847 0.218282227539 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0419966211297 0.0743258471296 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0455058244338 0.0701772020484 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0718390048481 0.128457276422 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0583103259026 0.0628817314937 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 14.3799401198 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.11 12.5979740519 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.63 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 124.0 98.500998004 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.