What does the AWT test?
The AWT tests your ability to critically analyze arguments and identify flaws in the reasoning, similar to the Analysis of Argument (AWA) section in the GMAT. It evaluates your critical thinking skills to logically pick out flaws in the given arguments and present them coherently.
Here are some examples of Analytical Writing Test (AWT) topics that could be part of the IIM Ahmedabad selection process:
AWT Topics
- Money should not be given to NGOs. They often end up spending it on themselves. Look at how many of them hold their meetings in expensive hotels. Moreover government is there to help the needy. Why is needy asking help from NGOs? Also the emotional advertising they use is very manipulative. These activities should be banned.
Analyze the argument. What is the author’s line of thought and assumptions made? What statements will strengthen or weaken the argument?
- “A lady smokes daily. She likes smoking even if it is bad for health. But she says that women in India are not given enough freedom.”
Analyze the argument and state your opinion.
- Tourism should be restricted by government as it leads to breakdown of family structure, promiscuity, drug use etc.
Is the argument justified?
- Galileo and Pythagoras should be respected more than Shakespeare and Mozart because they impact civilisation as it is today.
Give logical points against this argument.
How to approach the IIM-A AWT
To effectively tackle the AWT, start by examining each premise stated in the argument and evaluate its validity. Assess if the argument commits logical fallacies such as:
- Hasty generalization using narrow premises
- Premises based on facts or judgments and the data required to validate them
- Whether the data is sufficient to arrive at the conclusion
- Correlation-causation fallacy
Identify the assumptions made by the author and consider examples that counter the stated premises. Discuss what evidence would strengthen or weaken the argument and what changes would make it more logically sound.
The key is to critically analyze the reasoning and assumptions rather than simply agreeing or disagreeing with the argument.
