Jump to content
Urch Forums

emilymm

Members
  • Posts

    5
  • Joined

Converted

  • My Tests
    Yes

emilymm's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

1

Reputation

  1. Hi all! I'm taking the GRE pretty soon and would appreciate any feedback (and a grade) for my practice argument essay. Thank you in advance! Here's the question.... Many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered to all people in areas where the disease is detected. However, since there is a small possibility that a person will die as a result of the inoculations, we cannot permit inoculations against cow flu to be routinely administered. Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument. And my response... Much evidence is needed in order to evaluate the argument that routine administration of inoculations against cow flu should not be permitted. First, a cost/benefit analysis must be conducted; it is important to know exactly how many lives might be saved if the inoculation were to be routinely administered (i.e. mortality rate from the cow flu when people are not inoculated) and how many lives might be lost if the inoculation were to be routinely administered (i.e. the probability of inoculation-caused death). This comparison concerning the general population might shed some light on the net benefits of the inoculation. In addition to probabilities associated with population-level effects, it is important to delve deeper into what exactly the numbers mean. Are there specific vulnerable populations who are more susceptible to cow flu or more likely to die from the disease? Are there specific vulnerable populations who are at a higher risk of inoculation-caused mortality? Is there overlap between these two groups, or are they distinct (or even mutually exclusive)? If any of the above questions were to be answered, a more targeted approach to inoculation for cow flu could be implemented, saving as many people as possible. Providing the above answers and evidence could be incredibly beneficial to the population generally, but the most efficient and all-encompassing approach would be to examine the inoculation itself. Why do the cow flu inoculations come with a small possibility of death and how can that be fixed? This type of approach can be observed in the formulation of vaccines for the annual flu, which now come in multiple forms (live virus nasal spray and dead virus shot) in order to provide the preventative vaccine to those with compromised immune systems without placing them at risk for getting sick from the vaccine itself. If it were possible to understand the cause of potential mortality related to the cow flu inoculation, it could be possible to develop a better, less risky version of it. It is incredibly difficult to weigh the importance of protecting people from cow flu against the possibility of unintentionally causing death from inoculation. Life is valuable, and preventing as many deaths as possible should be of the utmost importance, especially for those involved in the creation and distribution of preventative measures. In order to make an assessment of whether or not inoculations against cow flu should be routinely administered, all the facts about how many people could be harmed (both with and without the inoculation) and whether there is a safer way to inoculate must be collected and examined altogether. Without this proper, holistic analysis of the issue, no truly evidence-based, ethically sound conclusion can be formed.
  2. Hi all! I'm taking the GRE pretty soon and would appreciate any feedback (and a grade) for my practice issue essay. Thank you in advance! Here's the question.... All too often, companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently. If companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees, such consultants would be unnecessary. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with these statements and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statements might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position. And my response... I disagree with the statement that companies who listen more to their own employees would not need outside consultants. Although listening to one's own employees and hiring outside consultants are two different approaches to company betterment, they are not mutually exclusive, and one approach would not necessarily eliminate a need for the other. Companies generally hire outside consultants to increase profit by boosting overall efficiency. These outside consultants take a 'big picture' stance when viewing what the company should change. The suggestions from outside consultants are important because they come from an objective and knowledgeable source, and companies often need the advice of others who are not involved in the day-to-day aspects of the company itself. In addition to receiving suggestions from hired outside sources, companies should also be sure to listen to their employees. The human resources side of business is certainly important in its own way, and ensuring the satisfaction of employees helps to keep up productivity within the company. This intra-business, individual-focused approach to company efficiency is certainly one important aspect, but it is certainly not the only necessity to run a successful business. One example of this multi-pronged approach in action involves the National Institutes of Health (NIH). At the NIH, outside contractors are hired to evaluate the quality of data analysis, assess both ethical and practical aspects of research proposals, and even provide a quadrennial review of the use of funds for research and the related outcomes. In addition to all these quality controls and efficiency checks that are necessary to keep the research on-track and of the highest possible quality, there are ample opportunities for employees themselves to make suggestions and express their own opinions on how to improve both the research itself and the work environment generally. This truly holistic approach allows employees to be heard in addition to utilizing the expertise of objective outsiders to improve the company as much as possible. Because employees are involved in very specific tasks or research areas, it would not make sense to only rely on individual suggestions. Especially in such a large, diversified work environment, it is important to have some suggestions from consultants who know how to remain detached and to assess the overall efficiency of such a large-scale environment. In some cases, such as with small start-up businesses, it may be true that employee opinions are the only ones necessary to increase efficiency, especially if there is a smaller budget with which to work. Given the cost of hiring outside consultants, it is certainly true that some of these smaller businesses would not benefit enough from the advice to justify the hiring, and that in-house assessment of efficiency could provide high quality suggestions for improvement. In these cases, the original statement could hold true. However, it is often the case that a multi-pronged, multi-level approach involving both subjective inside and objective outside suggestions provide the best assortment of suggestions for how to increase a company's efficiency.
  3. Hi all! I'm taking the GRE pretty soon and would appreciate any feedback (and a grade) for my practice issue essay. Thank you in advance! Here's the question.... All too often, companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently. If companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees, such consultants would be unnecessary. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with these statements and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statements might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position. And my response... I disagree with the statement that companies who listen more to their own employees would not need outside consultants. Although listening to one's own employees and hiring outside consultants are two different approaches to company betterment, they are not mutually exclusive, and one approach would not necessarily eliminate a need for the other. Companies generally hire outside consultants to increase profit by boosting overall efficiency. These outside consultants take a 'big picture' stance when viewing what the company should change. The suggestions from outside consultants are important because they come from an objective and knowledgeable source, and companies often need the advice of others who are not involved in the day-to-day aspects of the company itself. In addition to receiving suggestions from hired outside sources, companies should also be sure to listen to their employees. The human resources side of business is certainly important in its own way, and ensuring the satisfaction of employees helps to keep up productivity within the company. This intra-business, individual-focused approach to company efficiency is certainly one important aspect, but it is certainly not the only necessity to run a successful business. One example of this multi-pronged approach in action involves the National Institutes of Health (NIH). At the NIH, outside contractors are hired to evaluate the quality of data analysis, assess both ethical and practical aspects of research proposals, and even provide a quadrennial review of the use of funds for research and the related outcomes. In addition to all these quality controls and efficiency checks that are necessary to keep the research on-track and of the highest possible quality, there are ample opportunities for employees themselves to make suggestions and express their own opinions on how to improve both the research itself and the work environment generally. This truly holistic approach allows employees to be heard in addition to utilizing the expertise of objective outsiders to improve the company as much as possible. Because employees are involved in very specific tasks or research areas, it would not make sense to only rely on individual suggestions. Especially in such a large, diversified work environment, it is important to have some suggestions from consultants who know how to remain detached and to assess the overall efficiency of such a large-scale environment. In some cases, such as with small start-up businesses, it may be true that employee opinions are the only ones necessary to increase efficiency, especially if there is a smaller budget with which to work. Given the cost of hiring outside consultants, it is certainly true that some of these smaller businesses would not benefit enough from the advice to justify the hiring, and that in-house assessment of efficiency could provide high quality suggestions for improvement. In these cases, the original statement could hold true. However, it is often the case that a multi-pronged, multi-level approach involving both subjective inside and objective outside suggestions provide the best assortment of suggestions for how to increase a company's efficiency.
  4. I know I need to work a bit of work in this area and I'd appreciate any feedback (and a grade) for my practice argument essay. Thank you in advance! Here's the question.... Several charitable organizations in Pleasantville provide opportunities for teenagers to engage in community service. These organizations have a great need for volunteers, but in recent years, the number of teenage volunteers has significantly declined. The Pleasantville School Board should take measures to increase the number of volunteers. Teachers, parents, and other community members agree that it is important for young people to learn the value of community service. Requiring high school students to engage in community service would provide much-needed assistance to worthy local charities and would also help young people understand the importance of giving back to their community. For this reason, the Pleasantville School Board should institute a program requiring students of Pleasantville High School to complete 40 hours of community service prior to graduation. Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on the assumptions and what the implications are if the assumptions prove unwarranted. And my response... There are many assumptions associated with this argument for mandatory high school community service. One leap in logic concerns the statement that teachers and parents agree on the importance of learning the value of community service. It is possible that there is research to support the statement and that parent and teacher really do know best for the youth involved (although neither of those things are mentioned here). However, completing required community service does not necessarily teach the volunteers anything about the value of what they are doing. Instead, it is entirely possible that the requirement would be viewed as another homework assignment or worse, a chore to be completed without much thought. If this is the case, students would not be learning anything about the importance of volunteering and giving back to the community. Additionally, a required task may be approached in a lackluster way. If students are forced to complete the task of community service hours and there is no work quality check (and no associated classroom discussion group or introspective aspect), not all the students will necessarily "give their 100%." If this is the case, the assumption that the high schoolers would provide much-needed assistance would not necessarily remain true; some of the high schoolers would be providing less-than-valuable assistance, and they might actually get in the way of passionate volunteers or take up space that could be filled by more helpful workers. If both the above assumptions prove unwarranted, it would seem that instituting a community service requirement could potentially lead to a bunch of disinterested teenagers taking up volunteer spots and learning nothing from the experience. If the assumptions were to prove warranted and the high schoolers and charities would actually benefit from this policy, an additional assumption to address involves the number of required community service hours. How was the number 40 chosen? It is assumed that 40 hours over a student's high school career is enough time to learn the value of community work and have an enriching experience. If the Pleasantville high school is a standard 4-year high school, this means only 10 hours of service are required per year. Training is required for some community service organizations, and consistent help is often harder to come by than the occasional volunteer day. Therefore, those ten tiny hours (less than one hour per month) may not be enough time to provide any real valuable assistance to the charities, and it certainly doesn't seem like enough time for students to gain any real understanding of giving back to the community through volunteer work.
  5. I know I need a little work in this area and I'd appreciate any feedback (and a grade) for my practice issue essay. Thank you in advance! Here's the question.... Claim: The emergence of the online “blogosphere” and social media has significantly weakened the quality of political discourse in the United States. Reason: When anyone can publish political opinions easily, standards for covering news and political topics will inevitably decline. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based. And my response... I disagree with both the claim and the reasoning. It is true that social media has become more popular recently and is widely used. It may also be true that the quality of political discourse in this country has declined. However, despite the potential correlation of the two trends, claiming that the former caused the latter would require a leap in logic. The recent introduction and quick spread of social media into US culture has brought about many changes in the way people interact. It is easier than ever to keep in contact with friends and acquaintances far away, and updating everyone on oneself is as easy as the click of a button. In the blogosphere, anyone can post about virtually any subject. Googling a subject will turn up a plethora of opinion pieces, news articles, and (usually) a Wikipedia article or two. The potential to reach such a large audience through online publishing has widened the political discourse, both how many people are vocal and what is being discussed). This abundance of available opinions and the ability of people to share with one another and 'spread the word' has brought about the age of viral posts and cybernetworks of social movements. The development of this was observable in the online activity that took place after Hurricane Katrina. A multitude of posts and reposts about the horribly lagging (and lacking) emergency response brought together a group of bloggers with similarly appalled reactions. After recognizing their common beliefs about an injustice, they organized a minor movement in order to take action and bring the issue to the general public's attention. Through social media, this group was able to influence local, as well as some national, news reports, and the issues related to our domestic disaster relief were addressed by the responsible government agencies. The blogosphere in this case did not weaken the quality of political discourse, but may in fact have exposed an issue that could have (and may actually have) just been quickly explained away or covered up without being dealt with appropriately. It has not been proven that there is actually a decline in quality of political discourse. One might argue that there is sometime higher quality and more socially conscious discussion than in the past. However, assuming there is a decline in quality, many different factors could have caused it. The quality, as well as the scope, of political discussion is influenced by factors such as increased globalization and international affairs/conflicts, the economic state of the US, and political leadership, to name a few. Although social media has had an undeniable effect on the lives of Americans, it is difficult to parse out the relationship between such common aspects of daily life as political climate and social media presence. Although it is true that social media can be used to spread ignorant or unfactual 'issues' which may in turn make their way into the political discussion (e.g. the spread of the anti-vaccine movement), there are just as many important ideas being spread through the same virtual world. It is most necessary in this age to develop the skill to discern the 'junk' posts from the important ones, so that the ideas worth spreading do, in fact, circulate through social media.
×
×
  • Create New...