I think you misunderstand the 'analyze the argument' prompt. You are not to provide the answers; you are evaluating the proposal and you need more information to decide, so what questions would you ask? For example, asking why millet is a good question. Should there be more crops, different crops? Explain why their answer, whatever it may be, will help you decide. Don't make up the answers, except to say, "If they can prove that millet alone is sufficient, that would satisfy this question." And so on for any and every question. For example, ask for specific costs of the subsidies and how they might or might not be outweighed by the alleged benefits.
Tip: These arguments are always lacking in some way. Some are easier to pick apart than others. But they all make leaps of logic that you must point out.
Aside from that, your grammar needs work. Many of your phrases lack a definite article ("the").
shahaman06 wrote:
I had written these AWA in Manhattan Practice test. I had general idea of how to write AWA and this is my first time. Thanks for your time.
Analyse Argument Topic :
An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be paid subsidies for farming the new variety of millet. Since millet is already a staple food in Tagus, people will readily adopt the new variety. To combat vitamin A deficiency, the government of Tagus should do everything it can to promote this new type of millet.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
My Response :
Decision of using new breed of Millet to fight growing deficiency of Vitamin A in citizens of Tagus is commendable on part of government and should be aggresively promoted through the nation. Government has created a proper action plan, keeping both economically and mental condition of nation in mind. Government has answered to all burning question regarding the new policy.
Question are as follows :-
1. How was this problem discovered?
A. Government conducts a nation wide general survey every five year, and a controlled medical survey of over thousands of citizens to check progress of health condition of citizens of Tagus. Results from both study indicated that citizens of tagus are having decline in Vitamin A level drastically, which is leading to poor health condition.
2. What are action taken by government on this situation?
A. Taking matter seriously government issued a team dedicated to finding proper measures to fight it.
3. Why is millet , the crop being used here?
A. Use of Millet was considered for two main reason. First, using statistical data collected over the year, we researched which crop are being used with citizen extensively. This was done to find crop, which could be easily adapted by citizens and was being used by most. We were presented with few crops , millet being one of them.Second, A extensive research to create artificial breed of chosen crops with goal to maximise the vitamin A level in them. After 3 month long research , we were able to find best result with millet and its new potential breed.
4. Farmers will face the difficulty of growing the new breed of Millet. What steps are being taken for them?
A. Farmers play most important role in success of this new program, and we have taken all the problem they might face into the consideration. We have created a budget , and 50% of budget will be used to provide new tools, pesticides and fertilizers to farmers. To appretiate their efforts, they would be paid monthly subsidy too.
Hope this will build confidence in public that every action is being taken for the public's betterment.
Analyse Issue Topic :-
People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
My Response :-
Decision making is a complex process, which factors various things to derive at a answers, whatever it might be. It is an important job, which needs precision. One wrong decision, knowingly or unknowingly could have immeasurable impact with disastrous repercussions. Decision making takes in both logic and emotion as premise to arrive at a final conclusion. Both play an important role, but people who would weigh in only one of factor during the process, and then use other factor to justify the conclusion is wrong behaviour. This marks them as poor decision maker, displaying themselves as ill equipped and lacks proper knowledge. Thus, People who would use emotion only factor during decision making and use logic to justify their decision, their action should be considered as poor decision maker. Answer to queries being asked to support the statement are as follows:-
1. Is Decision making based on Emotion marks a poor decision maker?
A. No. Emotion is one of most relevant factors which guides are thought. It has ability to both cloud and clear our pure perception about things. Thus, they play important enough role, that they shouldn't be neglected in any circumstances. Instead a person, who doesn't takes emotions as factor during the process might be a sign of poor decision maker
2. Why is using logic as explanation considered wrong?
A. When decision making process is under process, only emotion is being used as factor, showcasing that mind is factoring a premise into its decision. When decision is tried to be justified using logic, the assumed premise is not being presented and instead a false impression is being reflected on others. Hiding the real reasons and deceiving others with such lies is not acceptable under any circumstances
3. If aftermath of decision made by people is good, then does this justify their action?
A. No. Justifying action based on aftermath is incorrect. Action reflect the true mindset of person, and irrespective of the final result observed. It is possible that aftermath of few result was good, even wonderful , but that doesn't assure the probability of something disastrous to nil.
Hope this resolves all the questions
END OF RESPONSE
PS: Please score both of them. Appreciate your efforts
14 Aug 2020, 23:11 
