AA008: workers apathetic about management issues

The common notion that workers are generally apathetic about management issues is false, or at least outdated: a recently published survey indicates that 79 percent of the nearly 1,200 workers who responded to survey questionnaires expressed a high level of interest in the topics of corporate restructuring and redesign of benefits programs.

The author of the argument claims that workers are not generally apathetic about management issues. The basis for this is that the opponet's point is outdated. The author further recommends that a recent survey indicats high interest of workers in some management topics such as corporate restructuring and redesign fo benefits programs. At first glance, the author's argument appears to be somewhat convincing, but close scrutiny reveals that the evidence cited in the analysis does not lend to strong support to what the author maintains.

In the first place, we must establish the meaning of the nebulous concept "management issues". If the term is synonymous with "orporate restructuring and redesign fo benefits programs", then the survey cited in the argument would strongly support the claim. But, normally, issues such as orporate restructuring and redesign of benefits programs are just a subgroup of the management issues; other issues such as decision rights of the workers and welfare distribution should be included in the management issues. Thus, for the speaker, the term "management issues" must essentially carry the meaning as orporate restructuring and redesign of benefits programs.

In the second place, the survey neglects to indicate how recently the survey was actually conducted. When samples are used to make general claim about a particular group, then the samples must be close enough in time to the generalization they are used to support, to that the historical changes will not invalidate the generalization. All we know in this survey is that the survey is rencently publised. The less recent the survey itself, the less reliable the results to indicate the generalization about the interest level of the workers.

In the third place, the autor are meant to strengtren his argument using some statistics. But these statistics are vague and oversimplified, and thus may distort the overall picture of the interest level of the workers. For example, 79 percent may be not significant enough to indicate a figure to support the arguer's conclusion. Moreover, the survey indicates that there are 1,200 respondents who expressed a high level of interest in the concerned topics, but fails to indicate the total number of the workers.

In the forth place, there is probable problem of biasness. perhaps workers who are interested in the management issues are more likely than other workers to respond to the survey--possibly because they found the questionnaires more interesting. Or perhaps a large number of workers pretended to be intereted in the management issues becaue of some wrongful reasons. In either event, the survey results would be useless in drawing conlusion about the workers' interest in the management issues.

In conclusion, the author fails to substantiate his claim that workers are not generally apathetic about management issues because he commits the above mentioned logical mistakes and fails to consider the whole situation comprehensively. To strengthen the argument, the author needs to convince us that the notion that workers are generally apathetic about management issues are really outdated. Finally, to better evaluate the author's claim we need more information about the preciseness of the survey.

欢迎大家斧正，不胜感激涕零~~~

挺好的呀。注意一下细节就更好了。建议如下仅供参考：

1多练习下打字速度

2时间来的及的话多看题目和提纲增加熟练程度。

3尽量留2-3分钟检查拼写和语法错误

4一般找三个逻辑错误就好了。每个都展开的充分一点。这样字数不会太少。又可以省去找第四个逻辑错误的时间。当然如果你对找错误很在行就另当别论。

感激死了，提出这么多错误和不当的地方！！！

谢谢judydongxueni!!!!! 太好了，太好了

[QUOTE]to that the historical changes will not invalidate the generalization. All we know in
这句没有看懂

拼写错误， 应该是so that the historical changes …

brace大虾：

怎么修改才能引人入胜啊？

先试一个吧

。。。老大， 改成AI008这样今后这个帖子还能被搜索到。

【发帖必读】---GMAT AWA区版规

cd小兵

否则就搜不到了。

题号呢？这样写等沉下去了，别人又看不见了。

快改，要不下次不给你看作文了！

天！果然犯错了……

今天也写了这篇，30分钟内只写了371个字，跟楼主的实在没法儿比，惭愧

之后自己改了一下，变成500多个字了，请大家帮我看看吧，谢谢

（红色是错误，蓝色是后来又写的加了进去，绿色是与红色部分替换的）

Citing the fact that in a recently published survey, most workers who responded expressed interest in the topics of corporate restructuring and redesign of benefits programs, the author concludes that the common notion that workers are generally apathetic about management issues is false, or at least outdated. The author's line of reasoning is attractive at first sight, but after close examination, I find it not very convincing in the following aspects.

First, the evidence the author provides is insufficient to support the conclusion drawn from it. One example is logically unsounded to establish a general conclusion, unless it can be shown that the situation reflected in the survey the author cites is representative of the general situation. It is possible that the survey was conducted inside a company in which workers are more interested in management issues than average. In fact, in face of such limited evidence, the conclusion that the common notion is false or at least outdated is unwarranted.

First（Second）, the author commits a fallacy of insufficient information（the survey cited by the author is too vague to be informative）. The author cites a recently published survey as the evidence to substantiate his conclusion, but we need more detailed information about the survey: who conducted the survey, when was the survey conducted, how did it pick the sample, and was the sample representative? Without such kind of information, we can not draw a convincing conclusion about a common notion.

Second, the author points out that 79 percent of the nearly 1,200 workers who responded to the survey showed interest in management issues. While these numbers seem to be persuading, they are actually very lacking of confirming powers. The nearly 1,200 workers who responded may be themselves inclined to care more about management issues. This result disregards the workers who did not respond to the survey, however, these workers are probably the most indifferent ones about management issues, and they may be a large part of（account for most of） the whole labor force. Under such circumstance, 79 percent of the responded would mean less than 50 percent of the whole. Then we will see most workers do not interest in management issues.（与前一段合为一点）

Finally, the author commits a fallacy of causal oversimplification. That workers show interest in corporate restructuring and redesign of benefits programs does not necessarily mean that they are enthusiastic about management issues. the（The） topics of corporate restructuring and redesign of benefits programs are not exactly the same as the management issues. Since benefits programs are beneficial to the workers themselves, workers do not necessarily care about such programs because they are interested in management issues, but rather because they want to increase their own level of lives.

In conclusion, the author's line of reasoning is unconvincing. To make the conclusion more convincing, the author should provide more detailed information about the survey（more evidences other than the survey）. To strengthen his argument, the author should give more detailed information about the survey and cites（cite） the percentage of the whole workers instead of the responded workers. To better assess the conclusion, we should investigate why the workers are interested in those topics so that we can establish the conclusion whether workers are generally apathetic about management issues.

原来写的就已经很好了呀！不要这么没有信心呵呵。由于你已经改的很好了，我基本都没有引用的必要了。真的很不错了，371个字也不少了。词汇结构逻辑以及自检能力都很好，不要妄自菲薄呀。

不知道你还有多长时间考，可以把目标和计划贴出来让大家帮你分析一下的。