According to a poll of 200 charitable organizations, donations of money to nonprofit groups increased by nearly 25 percent last year, though not all charities gained equally. Religious groups gained the most (30 percent), followed by environmental groups (23 percent), whereas educational institutions experienced only a very small increase in donations (3 percent). This poll indicates that more people are willing and able to give money to charities but that funding for education is not a priority for most people. These differences in donation rates must result from the perception that educational institutions are less in need of donations than are other kinds of institutions.
My response:
In the argument prompt, the author concludes that educational institutions receive lesser amounts of donations as compared to other charitable organizations due to the perception that educational institutions are in lesser need of donations. The author based his or her conclusion on the results of a poll that was conducted on 200 charitable organizations. The author’s argument stands weak as the poll is full of flaws and loopholes which render the author’s claims weak. The fallacies of the author’s argument will be presented as below.
Firstly, in order to determine the authenticity of the author’s claims, one must look at the manner the poll was conducted. One of the questions the reader should ask is: Where was the poll conducted? If the study was conducted in a specific region, it could present a skewed result. For example, if the study was conducted in a conservative area with more religious citizens, the citizens therefore have more of an inclination to donate to religious groups. If the poll was conducted in an affluent area, there would be less need for donation funds towards educational institutions, as usually affluent areas provide better educational facilities and resources.
Also, one must look at the characteristics of the data itself. The author failed to mention the breakdown of the types of organizations within the 200 charitable organizations the poll was conducted on. If there was a larger number of religious groups that was included in the poll as compared to other types of organizations that would surely affect the accuracy of data that was depicted.
The author claims that the poll itself is a strong indication of people’s perceptions that educational institutions are in less need of donations as compared to other institutions. The poll itself is insufficient for me to draw my conclusion on proposed statement. There could be another reason why there are lower amounts of donations for educational institutions. It could be due to the fact that educational institutions do not advertise and promote themselves as much (for example through charitable campaigns, fundraisers), thus leading to less visibility for them. People who are unaware of the donation needs of educational institutions would not donate to them otherwise.
In sum, the author’s argument stands weak. The author should provide stronger and more detailed statistical evidence to buttress his or her argument. Had the author taken the above factors into consideration, the argument would have been rendered irrefutable.
My response:
In the argument prompt, the author concludes that educational institutions receive lesser amounts of donations as compared to other charitable organizations due to the perception that educational institutions are in lesser need of donations. The author based his or her conclusion on the results of a poll that was conducted on 200 charitable organizations. The author’s argument stands weak as the poll is full of flaws and loopholes which render the author’s claims weak. The fallacies of the author’s argument will be presented as below.
Firstly, in order to determine the authenticity of the author’s claims, one must look at the manner the poll was conducted. One of the questions the reader should ask is: Where was the poll conducted? If the study was conducted in a specific region, it could present a skewed result. For example, if the study was conducted in a conservative area with more religious citizens, the citizens therefore have more of an inclination to donate to religious groups. If the poll was conducted in an affluent area, there would be less need for donation funds towards educational institutions, as usually affluent areas provide better educational facilities and resources.
Also, one must look at the characteristics of the data itself. The author failed to mention the breakdown of the types of organizations within the 200 charitable organizations the poll was conducted on. If there was a larger number of religious groups that was included in the poll as compared to other types of organizations that would surely affect the accuracy of data that was depicted.
The author claims that the poll itself is a strong indication of people’s perceptions that educational institutions are in less need of donations as compared to other institutions. The poll itself is insufficient for me to draw my conclusion on proposed statement. There could be another reason why there are lower amounts of donations for educational institutions. It could be due to the fact that educational institutions do not advertise and promote themselves as much (for example through charitable campaigns, fundraisers), thus leading to less visibility for them. People who are unaware of the donation needs of educational institutions would not donate to them otherwise.
In sum, the author’s argument stands weak. The author should provide stronger and more detailed statistical evidence to buttress his or her argument. Had the author taken the above factors into consideration, the argument would have been rendered irrefutable.
No comments:
Post a Comment