1. Alex D. Moyer
12/30/2016
Analytical writing sample
Analyze an Argument: A Model Essay
The following appeared as part of a recommendation from the financial planning office to
the administration of San Fern Valley University:
“In the past few years, Fern Valley University has suffered from a decline in both
enrollments and admissions applications. The reason can be discovered from our students,
who most often cite poor teaching and inadequate library resources as their chief sources of
dissatisfaction with Fern Valley. Therefore, in order to increase the number of students
attending our university, and hence to regain our position as the most prestigious
university in the greater Fern Valley metropolitan area, it is necessary to initiate a fund-
raising campaign among the alumni that will enable us to expand the range of subjects we
teach and to increase the size of our library facilities.”
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze
the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need
to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and alternative
explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what
sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument
would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate
its conclusion.
In today’s ultra-competitive climate, universities must continually vie for a coveted place among
the nation’s most elite institutions.Understandably, then, the proponent of this recommendation worries
that Fern Valley University (F.V.U.) is not as prestigious as it used to be and believes that the school
should take proactive steps to regain its competitive edge. Based on this line of reasoning, the author
concludes that it is imperative to initiate a fund-raising campaign to address the conditions that have

2. (presumably) caused a decline in applications and enrollment. Nevertheless, this argument relies on a
series of unproven assumptions that render the final recommendation vulnerable to criticism.
First and foremost, the author confuses a cause-and-effect relationship with a mere correlation. In
general, if variables A and B co-occur, there are several possible explanations: Either A causes B, B causes
A or a third underlying factor causes both A and B. In this case, dwindling application and enrollment
figures correlate with reported dissatisfaction with certain features of F.V.U. (e.g., the inadequacy of the
library facilities and the overall quality of instruction.) Yet assuming that these reports are even credible,
it does not automatically follow that poor teaching quality or inadequate lib rary facilities are the root
causes of declining enrollment and admissions. It is possible that despite general frustration with those
aspects of the school, some third and unmentioned cause is the primary culprit. Perhaps fewer recent
high school graduates can afford to pay tuition at any college due to a weak economy in the surrounding
region; by financial necessity, there could thus be a general trend towards entering the work force at an
earlier age instead of pursuing higher education at all. In this scenario, reports of frustration with the
library facilities or the quality of instruction could be incidental to the decline in matriculation. In turn,
that pattern would likely persist until school officials addressed the cost of tuition and the availaibility of
financial aid. Without sufficient information to rule out this or other possible causes for the decline, I
cannot accept the author's recommendation as it stands.
Furthermore, the author draws a definite conclusion from a survey that may have been
statistically invalid. If the sample of discontented students were too small--or if it did not constitute a
representative cross-section of the student body--then it would be illogical to draw any inference from
that survey whatsoever. Additionally, the actual quality of the data collected could be tainted. For
instance, if responses to the survey were not mandatory-- or if the form of the survey predisposed
respondents to answer questions in a particular way-- then the quality of the data would be highly
suspect. For all that we know, the survey may have distorted the importance of poor library facilities or

3. of poor teaching quality as explanations for student frustration. For instance, suppose that when asked
about their primary grievance, survey respondents had only two options from which to choose: the
university’s “inadequateinstruction & library facilities” or its “inadequate athletics department.” In this
scenario, those who prioritize academics over sports may have been more inclined to choose the former
simply because of the limited choices offered.
Not only does this argument rely on potentially flaw ed and invalid statistical evidence,but it also
assumes that a certain condition (e.g., initiating a fundraiser among the alumni) would be necessary and
sufficient for a desired result (e.g., increasing the size of the library facilities and the range of subjects
taught.) However, it does not necessarily follow that adopting the author’s recommendation is the single
most cost-effective way to achieve the stated objective. Likewise, a fundraiser, in and of itself, might be
insufficient to achieve this goal in the absence of other corrective measures.
Even if we grant the author’s "necessary-and-sufficient" assumption, moreover, we still cannot
rightly assume that an increased range of course offerings would translate to an improved quality of
instruction;or that a bigger library would necessarily contain better holdings;or that simply boosting the
number of incoming students would lead the school to reemerge as the most prestigious one in the
region. Perhaps F.V.U. would have to address other problems (e.g., delapidated school buildings or a
trend towards admitting many marginally or poorly qualified freshmen) to regain its previous place in
school rankings.
Overall, these logical errors make the speaker’s conclusion specious as currently formulated. In
order to better evaluate that conclusion, I would need to know the numbers of students who took the
survey and how the researchers collected the survey data. I would also need specific evidence indicating
that the author controlled systematically for extraneous factors to isolate the true cause for declining
enrollment. Additionally, the author would need to convince me that the fundraiser in question was the
best available means of improving the library and overall instruction at this school. Finally, he or she

4. would need to distinguish between quantity (i.e., the size of the library and the number of subjects
taught) and actual quality. In lieu of such evidence, endorsing the recommended course of action would
be a poor policy choice indeed.