GRE Prep Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Issue Task - All parents should be required to volunteer
[#permalink]
26 Dec 2020, 14:37
26 Dec 2020, 14:37
Quote:
All parents should be required to volunteer time to their children's schools.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
While volunteering reflects an important idea in today's society, requiring all children's parents to volunteer time for their schools is wrong, not necessary, and doing so ignores important factors that need to be considered before making or even stating such an inclusive decision.
The first obvious flaw of such an initiative is the overlooking at the parents' lives. There are many reasons for which a child's parents should be left for their own: parents to a poor family who work multiple shifts in order to put food on their plates; public position holders who already contribute to the society, and have a full schedule of community service months ahead. One more tragedic example is an orphan kid, which leads to the second problem with such a requirement.
As a direct corollary of the latter, what if one of the pupils is an orphan, and eventually being confronted with the situation without the required care? Not only s/he had to face a trauma at such a young age, watching all the other kids with their parents from the side is a potential to an unpleasant alienation, that can harm one's soul in countless ways. This leads to the inevitable question - is it really necessary? It can be easily seen that this requirement's benefits are actually negligible in many cases, where a school is already well-supported, or agrees with the statements above.
However, the last discern also yields a very plausible benefit of the initiative. Some schools public-funded, which means many times that they're underfunded and offer only a mediocre level of education. Therefore, requiring parents to devote time for their children's schools may answer both needs: First, volunteering for the school's benefit may assist its financial struggles and make more time for focusing on improving the level of education. Secondly, volunteering will set an example for the young citizens, and teach them an important moral lesson.
In conclusion, the requirement has its benefits, but these are overshadowed by the possible (and even inevitable) damages that be caused by such a generalizing and overlooking requirement.
--------------------------------------------------------
I'd appreciate a review of my response, including tips for improving my writing. I feel like there's a room for improvement.
I'm also not sure about how I should characterize the statement with word choices in relation to my opinion in the response (neutral or not).
Thanks.
Re: Issue Task - All parents should be required to volunteer
[#permalink]
21 Jan 2021, 10:36
21 Jan 2021, 10:36
Expert Reply
Thanks for posting! I don't see any typos or article issues so that's good 
Overall, this is better than average for the time allotted. I have made some comments for more advanced techniques such as parallelism
While volunteering reflects an important idea in today's society, requiring all children's parents to volunteer time for their schools is wrong, not necessary (unnecessary), and doing so(you broke the parallelism in this list. You had 2 nouns and a verb phrase. Instead perhaps writing "and inconsiderate, as it fails to take into account.... " ignores important factors that need to be considered before making or even stating such an inclusive decision.
The first obvious flaw of such an initiative is the overlooking at the parents' lives (this is a bit of a cumbersome way to say what you are trying to say. Instead it could say "failure to consider parents' priorities" since you are not really overlooking their lives and also that "at" is incorrectly used there.. There are many reasons for which a child's parents should be left for their own (this does not really make a lot of sense about leaving them for their own but I get the concept and like it): parents to (from) a poor family who work multiple shifts in order to put food on their plates; public position holders who already contribute to the society, and have a full schedule of community service months ahead. One more tragedic (i had to look up this word and I don't think it is used correctly but I could be wrong) example is an orphan kid (informal. Use child instead.), which leads to the second problem with such a requirement.
As a direct corollary of the latter, what if one of the pupils is an orphan, and eventually being confronted with the situation without the required care? Not only s/he (I would not use this word) had to face a trauma at such a young age, watching all the other kids with their parents from the side is a potential to an unpleasant alienation, that can harm one's soul in countless ways. This leads to the inevitable question - is it really necessary? It can be easily seen that this requirement's benefits are actually negligible in many cases, where a school is already well-supported, or agrees with the statements above.
However, the last discern (I am not sure this is correct word usage)also yields a very plausible benefit of the initiative. Some schools you are missing a verb herepublic-funded, which means many times that they're underfunded and offer only a mediocre level of education - are you talking about schools in Switzerland or Congo? You don't make this clear and that takes away from your argument. Therefore, requiring parents to devote time for their children's schools may answer both needs: First, volunteering for the school's benefit may assist its financial struggles (I am not sure that volunteering always offsets financial costs or how much it saves - nothing you or the prompt mention about it) and make more time for focusing on improving the level of education. Secondly, volunteering will set an example for the young citizens, and teach them an important moral lesson.
In conclusion, the requirement has its benefits, but these are overshadowed by the possible (and even inevitable) damages that be caused by such a generalizing and overlooking requirement.this reads a bit odd. Overlooking requirement sounds odd. I would also possibly restate the argument, because I do not see the word "volunteering" in the conclusion.
--------------------------------------------------------
I'd appreciate a review of my response, including tips for improving my writing. I feel like there's a room for improvement.
I'm also not sure about how I should characterize the statement with word choices in relation to my opinion in the response (neutral or not).
Thanks.
Overall, this is better than average for the time allotted. I have made some comments for more advanced techniques such as parallelism
idanorzach wrote:
Quote:
All parents should be required to volunteer time to their children's schools.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
While volunteering reflects an important idea in today's society, requiring all children's parents to volunteer time for their schools is wrong, not necessary (unnecessary), and doing so(you broke the parallelism in this list. You had 2 nouns and a verb phrase. Instead perhaps writing "and inconsiderate, as it fails to take into account.... " ignores important factors that need to be considered before making or even stating such an inclusive decision.
The first obvious flaw of such an initiative is the overlooking at the parents' lives (this is a bit of a cumbersome way to say what you are trying to say. Instead it could say "failure to consider parents' priorities" since you are not really overlooking their lives and also that "at" is incorrectly used there.. There are many reasons for which a child's parents should be left for their own (this does not really make a lot of sense about leaving them for their own but I get the concept and like it): parents to (from) a poor family who work multiple shifts in order to put food on their plates; public position holders who already contribute to the society, and have a full schedule of community service months ahead. One more tragedic (i had to look up this word and I don't think it is used correctly but I could be wrong) example is an orphan kid (informal. Use child instead.), which leads to the second problem with such a requirement.
As a direct corollary of the latter, what if one of the pupils is an orphan, and eventually being confronted with the situation without the required care? Not only s/he (I would not use this word) had to face a trauma at such a young age, watching all the other kids with their parents from the side is a potential to an unpleasant alienation, that can harm one's soul in countless ways. This leads to the inevitable question - is it really necessary? It can be easily seen that this requirement's benefits are actually negligible in many cases, where a school is already well-supported, or agrees with the statements above.
However, the last discern (I am not sure this is correct word usage)also yields a very plausible benefit of the initiative. Some schools you are missing a verb herepublic-funded, which means many times that they're underfunded and offer only a mediocre level of education - are you talking about schools in Switzerland or Congo? You don't make this clear and that takes away from your argument. Therefore, requiring parents to devote time for their children's schools may answer both needs: First, volunteering for the school's benefit may assist its financial struggles (I am not sure that volunteering always offsets financial costs or how much it saves - nothing you or the prompt mention about it) and make more time for focusing on improving the level of education. Secondly, volunteering will set an example for the young citizens, and teach them an important moral lesson.
In conclusion, the requirement has its benefits, but these are overshadowed by the possible (and even inevitable) damages that be caused by such a generalizing and overlooking requirement.this reads a bit odd. Overlooking requirement sounds odd. I would also possibly restate the argument, because I do not see the word "volunteering" in the conclusion.
--------------------------------------------------------
I'd appreciate a review of my response, including tips for improving my writing. I feel like there's a room for improvement.
I'm also not sure about how I should characterize the statement with word choices in relation to my opinion in the response (neutral or not).
Thanks.
gmatclubot
Re: Issue Task - All parents should be required to volunteer [#permalink]
21 Jan 2021, 10:36
Moderators:
