- UID
- 677080
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2011-9-28
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
模拟练习AW~ 写得不是很好，希望大家狠拍，指出缺点所在！
Practice Test 1: Analytical Writing
Part 2. Analyze an Argument
30 Minutes
You will have 30 minutes to organize your thoughts and compose a response that critiques the given argument. Do not respond to any argument other than the one given; a response to any other argument will receive a score of 0.
Argument Topic
The following memorandum was sent to the President of Arbayo Manufacturing from the human resources director.
“In order to reduce the turnover expense to the company associated with recruiting, hiring, and training, Arbayo should adopt a program of screening prospective new employees with multiple-choice tests designed to assess intelligence, emotional aptitude, and overall interests. This technique has clearly benefited Wixmer Bank: five years ago, two hundred recently hired Wixmer employees volunteered to undergo such testing. Five years later, over 80% of those employees were still employed at Wixmer, whereas the company as a whole had a retention rate of only 50%.”
Critique the reasoning used in this argument. You are not being asked to discuss your point of view on the argument. You should identify and analyze the central elements of the argument, the underlying assumptions that are being made, and any supporting information that is given. Your critique can also discuss other information that would strengthen or weaken the argument or make it more logical.
Essay:
The writer considers the MC test on the intelligence, emotional aptitude, and overall interests can serve as a good method for Arbayo (A) to reduce its turnover expense on issues like recruiting, hiring, and training. At first glance, his argument seems to be plausible. However, after an in-depth scrutiny on it, we will find this argument is untenable with a reasoning of flaws.
First off, the writer may presume that the MC test is more efficient, economic and accurate to judge what sort of people is best suitable for the A firm, therefore it can lead to a result of reduction of expense. How can we prove it? No evidence shows that the MC test will for sure cut the cost on recruiting, hiring and training at all, after all. An accurate MC exam of authority may require great input on the question making process, considering different factors like the functioning properties of the A firm, the targeting people for employment and other issues. The questions should be also renewed every a period. It may increase the expense reversely. Even if the cost can be reduced, the accuracy and availability of the test for a good selection to the right employees can also be a problem. Will the exam cover all necessary parts of the targeting people? After all, there are only three major parts involved—emotion, interests, and intelligence. The exam could be too vague to make a good distinguish about the employees. Even if it can select the right people, people may follow the rules about these sorts of questions and use exam tricks to pass it. Therefore, MC test method seems not functional without further evidence.
Secondly, the only evidence provided by the writer is the success in Wixmer Bank (WB). Based on this reference, the writer considers the MC test method will definitely work on A firm without considering the comparability issue. If these two firms are fundamentally different from each other, I wonder how they can be compared for an uncertain issue. Even if it can, there seems no relationship between the reduction of turnover expenses with the success of WB.
Moreover, even if they can be compared, the interpretation about the success of this method in WB could be of bias, therefore leading to a misunderstanding reference. 200 employees volunteered for the test 5 years ago, and 80% of them still work in WB considering a retention rate of 50%. How many employees are there in all? Maybe 20000 people, therefore 200 are only 1% of the whole, no sense to portray the full picture. It could also be possible that these people are at a high level in this firm, the leaders, therefore they have to serve as a model to volunteer the test without the risk of being fired. At least, the retention rate of 50% simply tells nothing. If these 200 people are fired next year, leading to a high retention rate, this evidence may fail to prove the writer’s point.
In sum, by dismissing the problems discussed above, the writer hastily generates a conclusion that Mc test can reduce the expense without strong evidence and firm reasoning. A further study should be made on it. Otherwise, no sound recommendation can be made.
29min
542 |
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2011-10-25 21:47:29
收藏
收藏
楼主
