The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine."Two studies of amphibians in Xanadu National Park confirm a significant decline in the numbers of amphibians. In 1975 there were seven species of amphibians in the park, and there were

Essay topics:

The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine.

"Two studies of amphibians in Xanadu National Park confirm a significant decline in the numbers of amphibians. In 1975 there were seven species of amphibians in the park, and there were abundant numbers of each species. However, in 2002 only four species of amphibians were observed in the park, and the numbers of each species were drastically reduced. One proposed explanation is that the decline was caused by the introduction of trout into the park's waters, which began in 1975. (Trout are known to eat amphibian eggs.)"

Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.

The argument above is well-presented and appears to be relatively sound at first glance: since the fewer number of amphibian species were observed in the second study, it seems plausible to argue that it was caused by the introduction of trout. However, as more light is shed on the issue and more detailed facts are concerned, the possibility of alternative explanations leads me to question the validity of the argument.

To begin with, the author needs to take account of alternative explanation for the different number of amphibians in each study. It is entirely possible that the first study was conducted for one year and the second study was conducted for a week. In this case, the second study observed fewer amphibians not because they actually reduced, but because the researchers did not have enough time to find them due to the time restriction. Also, it is plausible that the first study may have been conducted by a group of experts in the field and the second study was done by a group of college students specializing in a completely different field. If this were the case, it is more likely that the experts would have found more species of amphibians because of their expertise and knowledge compared to the amateurs.

Another alternative explanation for the credibility of the second study should be taken into consideration. The author states that the number of species decreased; however, it is likely that the numbers of amphibians did not actually reduce. Instead, the researchers simply may not have been able to find the amphibians. Since the argument states that the number of amphibians “observed” decreased, this does not indicate that they declined in actuality. Also, without detailed statistics on the decline, in all likelihood, the amphibians in the second study may not have drastically reduced. In this case, the difference of the number of amphibians in 1975 and 2000 is negligible, the so-called reduction may not be significant.

Lastly, the author needs to consider possible alternatives besides the contribution of Trout on the reduction in amphibian species. In all possibility, the amphibians decreased not because of the introduction of the trout, but because of other factors, such as humans, an environmental factor, or lack of food. Moreover, the reduction may not be contributed to other factor. One of the aforementioned factors may go hand-in-hand with the introduction of trout.

In conclusion, the aforementioned argument is not cogent on many grounds. To bolster the assertion, the author should rule out all the possible explanations mentioned above.

Votes
Average: 1.3 (3 votes)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2022-07-06 yomi idris 50 view
2022-07-04 Vincent Samuel 60 view
2022-02-10 piyushac123 54 view
2021-07-28 manjunath180397 58 view
2020-09-30 arjun8001 53 view
Essay Categories
Essays by user brbrl :

Comments

argument 1 -- not OK

argument 2 -- not OK

argument 3 -- OK
--------------------
flaws:
If you see topic like 'Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.', it means there are no arguments in the topics, you only need to give alternative explanations.

read a sample:
http://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-essays/following-letter-editor-environme…
--------------------------

Attribute Value Ideal
Score: ? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 422 350
No. of Characters: 2131 1500
No. of Different Words: 175 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.532 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.05 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.936 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 149 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 118 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 90 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 66 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.211 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.538 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.895 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.334 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.564 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.069 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5