Analyze an Argument Task

Understanding the Argument Task
The "Analyze an Argument" task assesses your ability to understand, analyze, and evaluate arguments
according to specific instructions and to clearly convey your evaluation in writing. The task consists of a
brief passage in which the author makes a case for some course of action or interpretation of events by
presenting claims backed by reasons and evidence. Your task is to discuss the logical soundness of the
author's case according to the specific instructions by critically examining the line of reasoning and the use
of evidence. This task requires you to read the argument and instructions very carefully. You might want
to read them more than once and possibly make brief notes about points you want to develop more fully in
your response. In reading the argument, you should pay special attention to
 what is offered as evidence, support, or proof
 what is explicitly stated, claimed, or concluded
 what is assumed or supposed, perhaps without justification or proof
 what is not stated, but necessarily follows from what is stated
In addition, you should consider the structure of the argument—the way in which these elements are linked
together to form a line of reasoning; that is, you should recognize the separate, sometimes implicit steps in
the thinking process and consider whether the movement from each one to the next is logically sound. In
tracing this line, look for transition words and phrases that suggest that the author is attempting to make a
logical connection (e.g., however, thus, therefore, evidently, hence, in conclusion).
An important part of performing well on the Argument task is remembering what you are not being asked
to do. You are not being asked to discuss whether the statements in the argument are true or accurate. You
are not being asked to agree or disagree with the position stated. You are not being asked to express your
own views on the subject being discussed (as you were in the Issue task). Instead, you are being asked to
evaluate the logical soundness of an argument of another writer according to specific instructions and, in
doing so, to demonstrate the critical thinking, perceptive reading, and analytical writing skills that
university faculty consider important for success in graduate school.
It is important that you address the argument according to the specific instructions. The specific
instructions might ask you to:
 Discuss what specific evidence would strengthen or support the argument and explain how the
evidence would provide support to the argument
 Discuss what specific evidence would weaken or undermine the argument and explain how the
evidence would weaken or undermine the argument
 Discuss the unstated assumptions of the argument and what the implications are if the assumptions
prove unwarranted
 Discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to properly evaluate the argument’s
soundness or validity
 Discuss what alternative explanations could rival the argument’s explanation of a certain
phenomena and demonstrate how the alternatives would do so
"Evaluate an Argument" is primarily a critical thinking task requiring a written response. Consequently,
the analytical skills displayed in your evaluation carry great weight in determining your score; however, the
clarity with which you convey ideas is also important to your overall score.
Understanding the Context for Writing: Purpose and Audience
The purpose of the task is to see how well equipped you are to insightfully evaluate an argument written by
someone else and to effectively communicate your evaluation in writing to an academic audience. Your
audience consists of college and university faculty from a wide range of academic fields who are trained as
GRE readers to apply the scoring criteria identified in the scoring guide for the “Analyze an Argument”
task (see page 31).
To get a clearer idea of how GRE readers apply the Argument scoring criteria to actual essays, you should
review scored sample Argument essay responses and readers' commentaries. The sample responses,
particularly at the 5 and 6 score levels, will show you a variety of successful strategies for organizing and
developing an insightful evaluation. The readers' commentaries discuss specific aspects of analytical
writing, such as cogency of ideas, development and support, organization, syntactic variety, and facility
with language. These commentaries will point out aspects that are particularly effective and insightful as
well as any that detract from the overall effectiveness of the responses.
Preparing for the Argument Task
Because the Argument task is meant to assess analytical writing and informal reasoning skills that you have
developed throughout your education, it has been designed so as not to require any specific course of study
or to advantage students with a particular type of training. Many college textbooks on rhetoric and
composition have sections on informal logic and critical thinking that might prove helpful, but even these
might be more detailed and technical than the task requires. You will not be expected to know methods of
analysis or technical terms. For instance, in one topic an elementary school principal might conclude that
the new playground equipment has improved student attendance because absentee rates have declined
since it was installed. You will not need to see that the principal has committed the post hoc, ergo propter
hoc fallacy; you will simply need to see that there are other possible explanations for the improved
attendance, to offer some common-sense examples, and perhaps to suggest what would be necessary to
verify the conclusion. For instance, absentee rates might have decreased because the climate was mild.
This would have to be ruled out in order for the principal’s conclusion to be valid.
Although you do not need to know special analytical techniques and terminology, you should be familiar
with the directions for the Argument task and with certain key concepts, including the following:
 alternative explanation—a possible competing version of what might have caused the events in
question; an alternative explanation undercuts or qualifies the original explanation because it too
can account for the observed facts
 analysis—the process of breaking something (e.g., an argument) down into its component parts in
order to understand how they work together to make up the whole
 argument—a claim or a set of claims with reasons and evidence offered as support; a line of
reasoning meant to demonstrate the truth or falsehood of something
 assumption—a belief, often unstated or unexamined, that someone must hold in order to maintain
a particular position; something that is taken for granted but that must be true in order for the
conclusion to be true
 conclusion—the end point reached by a line of reasoning, valid if the reasoning is sound; the
resulting assertion
 counterexample—an example, real or hypothetical, that refutes or disproves a statement in the
argument
 evaluation—an assessment of the quality of evidence and reasons in an argument and of the
overall merit of an argument
An excellent way to prepare for the "Analyze an Argument" task is to practice writing on some of the
published Argument topics. There is no one way to practice that is best for everyone. Some prefer to start
practicing without adhering to the 30-minute time limit. If you follow this approach, take all the time you
need to evaluate the argument. No matter which approach you take, you should
 carefully read the argument and the specific instructions—you might want read them over more
than once
 identify as many of the argument’s claims, conclusions, and underlying assumptions as possible
and evaluate their quality
 think of as many alternative explanations and counterexamples as you can
 think of what specific additional evidence might weaken or lend support to the claims
 ask yourself what changes in the argument would make the reasoning more sound
Write down each of these thoughts as a brief note. When you've gone as far as you can with your
evaluation, look over the notes and put them in a good order for discussion (perhaps by numbering them).
Then write an evaluation according to the specific instructions by fully developing each of your points in
turn. Even if you choose not to write a full essay response, you should find it very helpful to practice
evaluating a few of the arguments and sketching out your responses. When you become quicker and more
confident, you should practice writing some Argument responses within the 30-minute time limit so that
you will have a good sense of how to pace yourself in the actual test. For example, you will not want to
discuss one point so exhaustively or to provide so many equivalent examples that you run out of time to
make your other main points.
You might want to get feedback on your response(s) from a writing instructor, a philosophy teacher, or
someone who emphasizes critical thinking in his or her course. It can also be very informative to trade
papers on the same topic with fellow students and discuss one another's responses in terms of the scoring
guide. Focus not so much on giving the "right scores" as on seeing how the papers meet or miss the
performance standards for each score point and what you therefore need to do in order to improve.
How to Interpret Numbers, Percentages, and Statistics in Argument Topics

Some arguments contain numbers, percentages, or statistics that are offered as evidence in support of the
argument's conclusion. For example, an argument might claim that a certain community event is less
popular this year than it was last year because only 100 people attended this year in comparison with 150
last year, a 33 percent decline in attendance. It is important to remember that you are not being asked to do
a mathematical task with the numbers, percentages, or statistics. Instead you should evaluate these as
evidence intended to support the conclusion. In the example above, the conclusion is that a community
event has become less popular. You should ask yourself: does the difference between 100 people and 150
people support that conclusion? Note that, in this case, there are other possible explanations; for example,
the weather might have been much worse this year, this year's event might have been held at an
inconvenient time, the cost of the event might have gone up this year, or there might have been another
popular event this year at the same time. Each of these could explain the difference in attendance, and thus
would weaken the conclusion that the event was "less popular." Similarly, percentages might support or
weaken a conclusion depending on what actual numbers the percentages represent. Consider the claim that
the drama club at a school deserves more funding because its membership has increased by 100 percent.
This 100 percent increase could be significant if there had been 100 members and now there are 200
members, whereas the increase would be much less significant if there had been 5 members and now there
are 10. Remember that any numbers, percentages, or statistics in Argument tasks are used only as evidence
in support of a conclusion, and you should always consider whether they actually support the conclusion.
The Form of Your Response
You are free to organize and develop your response in any way that you think will effectively communicate
your evaluation of the argument. Your response may, but need not, incorporate particular writing strategies
learned in English composition or writing-intensive college courses. GRE readers will not be looking for a
particular developmental strategy or mode of writing. In fact, when faculty are trained to be GRE readers,
they review hundreds of Argument responses that, although highly diverse in content and form, display
similar levels of critical thinking and analytical writing. Readers will see, for example, some essays at the
6 score level that begin by briefly summarizing the argument and then explicitly stating and developing the
main points of the evaluation. The readers know that a writer can earn a high score by developing several
points in an evaluation or by identifying a central feature in the argument and developing that evaluation
extensively. You might want to look at the sample Argument responses, particularly at the 5 and 6 score
levels, to see how other writers have successfully developed and organized their responses.
You should make choices about format and organization that you think support and enhance the overall
effectiveness of your evaluation. This means using as many or as few paragraphs as you consider
appropriate for your response—for example, creating a new paragraph when your discussion shifts to a new
point of evaluation. You might want to organize your evaluation around the structure of the argument
itself, discussing the argument line by line. Or you might want to first point out a central questionable
assumption and then move on to discuss related weaknesses in the argument's line of reasoning. Similarly,
you might want to use examples if they help illustrate an important point in your evaluation or move your
discussion forward (remember, however, that, in terms of your ability to perform the Argument task
effectively, it is your critical thinking and analytical writing, not your ability to come up with examples,
that is being assessed). What matters is not the form the response takes, but how insightfully you evaluate
the argument and how articulately you communicate your evaluation to academic readers within the
context of the task.
Sample Argument Task
"In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating, and fishing) among their favorite
recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however,
and the city park department devotes little of its budget to maintaining riverside recreational facilities. For
years there have been complaints from residents about the quality of the river's water and the river's smell.
In response, the state has recently announced plans to clean up Mason River. Use of the river for water
sports is, therefore, sure to increase. The city government should for that reason devote more money in this
year's budget to riverside recreational facilities."
Write a response in which you examine the unstated assumptions of the argument above. Be sure to
explain how the argument depends on the assumptions and what the implications are if the assumptions
prove unwarranted.
Strategies for this Topic
This argument cites a survey to support the prediction that the use of the Mason River is sure to increase
and thus recommends that the city government should devote more money in this year’s budget to the
riverside recreational facilities.
In developing your evaluation, you are asked to examine the argument’s unstated assumptions and discuss
what the implications are if the assumptions prove unwarranted. A successful response, then, must discuss
both unstated assumptions AND the implications of those assumptions for the argument. A response that
does not address both parts of the task may not receive a 5 or a 6.
Though responses may well raise other points not mentioned here and need not mention all of these points,
some unstated assumptions of the argument, and some ways in which the argument depends on those
assumptions, include:
 The assumption that people who rank water sports "among their favorite recreational activities"
actually likely to participate in them. (It is possible that they just like to watch them.) This
assumption underlies the claim that use of the river for water sports is sure to increase after the
state cleans up the Mason River and that the city should for that reason devote more money to
riverside recreational facilities.
 The assumption that what residents say in surveys can be taken at face value. (It is possible that
survey results exaggerate the interest in water sports.) This assumption underlies the claim that
use of the river for water sports is sure to increase after the state cleans up the Mason River and
that the city should for that reason devote more money to riverside recreational facilities.
 The assumption that Mason City residents would actually want to do water sports in the Mason
River. (As recreational activities, it is possible that water sports are regarded as pursuits for
vacations and weekends away from the city.) This assumption underlies the claim that use of the
river for water sports is sure to increase after the state cleans up the Mason River and that the
city should for that reason devote more money to riverside recreational facilities.
 The assumption that the park department devoting little of its budget to maintaining riverside
recreational facilities means that these facilities are inadequately maintained. This assumption
underlies the claim that the city should devote more money in this year's budget to riverside
recreational facilities. If current facilities are adequately maintained, then increased funding
might not be needed even if recreational use of the river does increase.
 The assumption that the riverside recreational facilities are facilities designed for people who
participate in water sports and not some other recreational pursuit. This assumption underlies the
claim that the city should devote more money in this year's budget to riverside recreational
facilities.
 The assumption that the dirtiness of the river is the cause of its being little used and that cleaning
up the river will be sufficient to increase recreational use of the river. (Residents might have
complained about the water quality and smell even if they had no desire to boat, swim, or fish in
the river.) This assumption underlies the claim that the state's plan to clean up the river will
result in increased use of the river for water sports.
 The assumption that the complaints about the river are numerous and significant. This
assumption motivates the state's plan to clean up the river and underlies the claim that use of the
river for water sports is sure to increase. (Perhaps the complaints are coming from a very small
minority; in which case cleaning the river might be a misuse of state funds.)
 The assumption that the state's clean up will occur soon enough to require adjustments to this
year's budget. This assumption underlies the claim that the city should devote more money in
this year's budget to riverside recreational facilities.
 The assumption that the clean up, when it happens, will benefit those parts of the river accessible
from the city's facilities. This assumption underlies the claim that the city should devote more
money to riverside recreational facilities
 The assumption that the city government ought to devote more attention to maintaining a
recreational facility if demand for that facility increases.
 The assumption that the city should finance the new project and not some other agency or group
(public or private).
Should any of the above assumptions prove unwarranted, the implications are:
 That the logic of the argument falls apart/ is invalid/ is unsound.
 That the state and city are spending their funds unnecessarily.