offers hundreds of practice questions and video explanations. Go there now.

# GMAT Tuesdays with Kevin: AWA Argument Analysis Outline

This week, I talk about how to extract the most important information from the argument that you’ll have to write your essay about– enjoy! ðŸ™‚ Let us know if you have any suggestions for future video topics, we’d love to hear your thoughts!

By the way, sign up for our 1 Week Free Trial to try out Magoosh GMAT Prep!

### 4 Responses to GMAT Tuesdays with Kevin: AWA Argument Analysis Outline

1. Rupsha Das May 9, 2014 at 2:04 am #

Hola, Kevin!

Yes, it does make sense. I think I wasn’t very clear and didn’t word it right. I meant that the particular timeline (25 years in business), besides them both being processing units, was the basis on which they drew, or rather thought there was room for, the analogy. I hope I’m making sense.

Anyway, I think we are more or less on the same page. Again, correct me if I am wrong.

Thanks very much for taking the time to respond. You are a joy to watch (Youtube videos) and correspond with.

Have a good one!

-Rupsha.

• Kevin May 9, 2014 at 9:12 am #

Â¿Que Pasa, Rupsha?

Glad I could help! ðŸ™‚ And I think we are on the same page here. The argument does use the 25 years as a basis for the comparison. You are making perfect sense! ðŸ™‚

Thanks for the kind words too! It’s always nice to hear when someone likes the videos. ðŸ™‚

Cheers!

2. Rupsha Das April 2, 2014 at 8:26 am #

Hi, Kevin!

Thanks for the Video on AWA. It’s very helpful.

I had a question… You said that all the information about the dates related to the color processing industry was irrelevant, however, I think I disagree on that. From what I see it was one of the reasons behind the misplaced analogy. They assumed that because the costs reduced and the profits increased over 25 years for the color film processing plants the same would be true for Olympic foods as they were at the 25th year mark.

Thank you!
-Rupsha.

• Kevin April 2, 2014 at 10:21 am #

Howdy Rupsha! ðŸ™‚

Thanks for the question! I re-watched the video and I saw that I said that the dates were not super important. I guess I was a little unclear. What I meant was that the actual dates are not super important. What is important is to notice that they are talking about a period of time and that cost went down during that time.

I agree that it is important to notice the dates. I actually make that point when I mention the second flawâ€”assuming that nothing changes over time. And as for your point about the false analogy, I think you are correct. The false analogy I point out is more general than yours. I am talking about the assumption that these two industries are similar enough to be comparable.

The point that you are making about time is actually the only thing that the argument offers as a similarity between the two companies, besides the fact that they both process things. And I think you are correct that this similarity is part of the analogy, but no so much a reason for why the analogy is false. It is more about the difference between these two industries.

Does that make sense?

Hope this helps! ðŸ™‚

Magoosh blog comment policy: To create the best experience for our readers, we will only approve comments that are relevant to the article, general enough to be helpful to other students, concise, and well-written! ðŸ˜„ Due to the high volume of comments across all of our blogs, we cannot promise that all comments will receive responses from our instructors.

We highly encourage students to help each other out and respond to other students' comments if you can!

If you are a Premium Magoosh student and would like more personalized service from our instructors, you can use the Help tab on the Magoosh dashboard. Thanks!