ahead

Just wondering if the AWA portion is dead. I posted a couple of reviews and my own essays for review almost a week ago, and they are still the freshest posts...

Schaum's outline of theory and problems of finite mathematics, by Seymour Lipschutz. Work through each problem in chapters 14 and 15, and you're set.

I think you missed the conclusion that the author is trying to make. The phrase you've interpreted as the conclusion I would interpret as evidence. So, Conclusion: It makes sence for employers to make the workplace safer Evidence: As injuries increase, pay also increases Assumption: Investments in safety will be compensated by savings in wages There are other assumptions and logical flaws, for example that risk to an employee can be measured and quantified, that there are in fact ways to make the workplace safer, etc. But the main components are the 3 above. Otherwise, good essay, well structured. Here is how I would rate it: Structure: 6 Content: 3.5 Style: 5 Overall: 4.8

I agree with the previous reader that your essay needs to be more structured. I like your writing style, it has a nice flow to it, and is easy to read. Would be good to sprinkle your essay with more advance vocabulary. The statement deals with whether or not competition is benefitial to the COMPANY. You, however, mostly discuss how it benefits the consumer. Good use of an example though. I would give you: Structure: 3 Style: 4 Content: 3.5 Overall: 3.5

The following appeared in the editorial section of a West Cambria newspaper: “A recent review of the West Cambria volunteer ambulance service revealed a longer average response time to accidents than was reported by a commercial ambulance squad located in East Cambria. In order to provide better patient care for accident victims and to raise revenue for our town by collecting service fees for ambulance use, we should disband our volunteer service and hire a commercial ambulance service.” Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc. The argument above states that disbanding the volunteer ambulance force will serve two purposes. First, the author suggests that doing so will increase the city’s revenue. Second, the author states that charging service fees and using a commercial service will improve patient care for accident victims. As evidence the author states that in a recent review of the West Cambria volunteer ambulance service it was revealed that the average response time to accidents was longer than in East Cambria, served by a commercial ambulance service. The argument relies on several dubious assumptions. First of all, the author does not mention how material was the difference in the response times between the commercial and the volunteer ambulance forces. An average difference does not itself indicate a statistically significant result. If the difference in the response times was within the margin of error, it is hardly an evidence of a higher or lower standard of quality. Next, the author makes a connection between the fees collected by the municipality of Cambria for the ambulance service, and revenues of the municipality. No evidence is given in support of this claim. The additional fees in fact may not be enough to cover the additional commercial ambulance services. The author then commits a logical fallacy by implying that reduced response times are directly related to the quality of patient care. No such connection is evident. The raw response time should not be the goal of any emergency service. It is the final outcome of the incident is what is important in evaluating the medical service. If an ambulance is fast to the accident site, but carries unqualified paramedics, it is hardly preferable to a slightly slower service with more qualified personnel, who can provide adequate care at the site and on the way to the hospital. The argument could have been stronger if the author cited specific figures related to the response times. The statistics showing the comparison of final outcomes of the ambulance calls also could have helped make a better case. Finally, financial figures showing the comparison of the impact of the additional service fees and expenses associated with the commercial service, would have made the argument stronger. In summary, the argument above is weak because lacks in factual support, relies on unsupported assumptions, and is logically flawed.

“Some employers who recruit recent college graduates for entry-level jobs evaluate applicants only on their performance in business courses such as accounting, marketing, and economics. However, other employers also expect applicants to have a broad background in such courses as history, literature, and philosophy.” Do you think that, in the application process, employers should emphasize one type of background—either specialization in business courses or a more varied academic preparation—over the other? Why or why not? Develop your position by using reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading. The author of this editorial presents two alternative approaches to selecting candidates for an entry-level position. One approach concentrates on the core skills of the applicant. As an example, the author cites the applicant’s performance in courses such as accounting, marketing and economics for a business-related role. The other approach is to also probe the applicant’s performance in a broad range of topics, such as history, literature and philosophy. According to Jack Welch, an acclaimed leader and a former CEO of General Electric, “technical expertise is a given”, meaning that the applicants will stand no chance of being considered for a position if they lack the essential skills required for their job. The question is, whether or not the employers should go beyond the evaluation of the core skills. The applicant’s performance in the areas other than their core skill is evidence of the flexibility of their mind, and indicates an ability to learn a variety of subjects. As an employee progresses in an organization, he or she will have to deal with a variety of problems and projects, requiring to adjust quickly to the changing environments. Such situations may require cross-disciplinary knowledge. Perhaps even more important than the formal college subjects are the applicant’s social abilities. Will he or she add to the morale of the organization, be able to work effectively as part of the team, have the necessary attention to the detail? Or will she be detrimental to the overall goal of the company, even if she possesses the core and extended knowledge acquired in college? Such social skills are of extreme importance, and I would rank them together with the abilities directly related to the subject matter of the potential position. In summary, the core abilities required for the job are of a paramount importance. Equally important are the social skills and traits of the applicant. The broader areas of knowledge may indicate additional abilities that may prove valuable, and all else being equal may tip the scale toward the applicant who has the breadth of knowledge in addition to the breadth.