GMAT Task 03: A Large City’s Council

by PJWisaksono

Task 03

Date: 5 September 2016

 

Question:

The following appeared in a memorandum issued by a large city’s council on the arts:

“In a recent citywide poll, 15 percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our city’s art museums has increased by a similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports public television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, we can expect that attendance at our city’s art museums will also start decrease. Thus some of the city’s funds for supporting the arts should be reallocated to public television.”

Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discussion what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.

Source: http://www.mba.com/~/media/Files/mba/NEWTheGMAT/AnalysisofanArgument100606.pdf

=====

My Answer (corrections and/or comments available in the brackets are made by Mrs Amanda, a teacher of IELC Solo):

A memorandum of a large city’s council on the arts stated that more of the city’s budget should be used more for public television than art museums. However, the argument needs to be reevaluated since there are some factors that are still not supported enough (and faulty reasoning) .

At first, we can see (use passive to avoid writing “we”) that the poll has yet to reveal detailed information regarding how the poll was conducted, how many residents were used as interviewees, and about the circumstances of the latest poll and the one conducted five years ago. In addition, the statistical methods used for both polls is also important to know, such as whether both have the same methods or not, whether both have the same assumptions, and so many things (stop doing this “so many things”).

Then, the number of people watching certain television programs is not comparable with the number of people visiting art museums. Perhaps the similarity of the growth (15%) is just a coincidence. Then, the decrease of people watching television may not affect to the attendance of art museums.

In the argument, there is no information regarding what the museum’s management has been doing. Probably, during the five years, the management has been enhancing its service. For example, by adding more to the collection, improving comfortability, redesigning its concept, installing interactive facilities, implementing a good marketing strategy and so on that can attract more people to come. (this paragraph is off topic. Do not try to create a solution. Just attack the argument)

Due to the reasons mentioned, the city council should rethink its argument in cutting the budget on art museums. The majority of the fundings for television programs are from corporations. Hence, the council may ask the television management to evaluate its program whether each program now has lower rating or not. In other words, do people like the programs or not? Then, for art museums, it is better for the city to keep donating for the improvement of the art museums, because commonly the museums are the centre of study of young generation especially (run on sentence) about the city’s or the nation’s histories.

Italic Words: Words corrected by the teacher

Words in Brackets: comments from the teacher

=====

Sample Answer 1:

The following appeared in a memorandum issued by a large city’s council on the arts. “In a recent citywide poll, fifteen percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our city’s art museums has increased by a similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports public television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, we can expect that attendance at our city’s art museums will also start to decrease. Thus some of the city’s funds for supporting the arts should be reallocated to public television.” Discuss how well reasoned . . . Etc.

The author concludes that the city should allocate some of its arts funding to the public television in order for the attendance at the city art museums not to further decrease. The argument is based on the two assumptions: 1) the number of audience of art programs on public television is appropriate to that of local art museums, and 2) the public television faced of severe funding cuts. While this argument is somewhat convincing, it is not sound because its line of reasoning is not compelling.

First of all, the author commits the “Confused Cause and Effect” fallacy. The argument depends on the assumption that increased exposure to the visual arts on public television has caused a similar increase in local art-museum attendance in the past years. However, the poll that increased art-museum attendance is statistically correlated with similar increases in television viewing of visual-arts programs, does not necessarily mean that the increased television viewing of arts is the cause of the rise in museum attendance. There may be other factors relevant to increased interest in the local art museum during the past years. For example, some larger social or cultural factors may cause greater public interest in municipal art museums.

Second, the argument does not address the effectiveness of citywide poll conducted five years ago. The survey may be biased. If the respondents do not properly represent the whole residents, then the poll is not convincing. Moreover, since the survey was conducted five years ago, the statistics can become invalid and can no longer be used as future prediction.

In conclusion, the argument is not convincing enough and would be strengthened if the author were to eliminate other significant factors that might have caused the increase in visits to the local art museum, as well as to address the soundness o the survey conducted five years ago.

Source: http://www.eduers.com/gmat/sampleargument03.htm

=====

Sample Answer 2:

The author’s conclusion, that some of the city’s funds for supporting the arts should be reallocated to public television, is flawed. The author’s strong conclusion is based on weak evidence. The presented evidence makes unsubstantiated assumptions about the relationship between residents who watch television programs about the visual arts and people who visit the city’s art museums. Furthermore, the evidence has several statistical flaws and ignores the fundamentals of supply and demand.

First, the evidence presents several statistical flaws. The author indicates that 15 percent more residents watch television programs about the visual arts than residents who did five years ago. Because the author does not indicate the number of people who answered affirmatively in the recent poll and the number of people who answered affirmatively five years ago, it is not possible to establish a conclusion based on the evidence presented. For example, if the city’s population had grown by 15 percent in the last five years, then the evidence, that 15 percent more people watch visual arts programs on television than five years ago, is not useful.

Secondly, the author infers a direct relationship between the people who watch visual arts programs on television and the people who visit the city’s art museums. The author insinuates that because of a similar increase in people visiting the city’s art museums and the people who watch visual arts programs on television means that these are the people who visit the city’s art museums. This unsubstantiated assumption is flawed. If, for example, the city’s art museums had a new popular exhibit, that could account for the increase in visitors.

Thirdly, the author ignores the fundamentals of supply and demand. If there are less visual arts programs on television, the fundamentals of supply and demand suggest that an increase in the number of visitors to art museums and performing arts theatres would increase, not decrease. Thus, the proposal to increase funding for public television and decrease funding for art museums is flawed.

Finally, the argument could be strengthened in several ways. If the author presented evidence that the city has not grown in population over the last five years, then the statistical argument would not be flawed. Furthermore, if the author could provide information showing that the people who watch visual arts programs on televisions are the same people who visit the city’s art museums, the conclusion would be strengthened. However, in its current form, the argument is flawed. The conclusion is based on weak evidence, unsubstantiated assumptions, and statistical flaws.

Source: http://gmatclub.com/forum/first-gmat-awa-please-read-and-comment-135786.html