In this memo, the author claims that the decrease in the number of shoppers in Central Plaza is because of the popularity of skateboarding, and therefore that prohibiting skateboarding in the plaza will prevent further decrease and would help the business to become regular as before it was. To support these assertions, the author points out that the amount of litter and vandalism throughout the plaza might be related with the skaters and eliminating these acts should be held. On several grounds, this evidence provides little credible support for the memo’s recommendation, as discussed below.
First of all, the memo needs to ask whether did really litter and vandalism increased. The key is the extent to which skaters do such acts and effect shoppers to think they are bothering their feelings. It is entirely possible that majority of people would construe it as an advent of a new art style , and that people might want to enjoy more. Or perhaps, it might be just a practice for skating and skaters just chose the place to aggregate more people to join them. Imputing the decline of business to them may be like an excuse for the plaza to cover their poor business management ability. The fact that skater has to do with vandalism and litter is weak evidence since it could be just an alternative excuse for their business stagnation.
Secondly, the memo needs to ask what would be other causes that could have cause business decline. Yet the memo fails to account for this fact in concluding that the recent change in the plaza is skater’s increase and didn’t explain other possible reasons for it. In all likelihood, the time when skaters come out and the time when shoppers appear in the plaza might be different. For example, consider skaters work out at night and shoppers visit the plaza only in the days as shops usually open on daytime. Still the fact that skaters increased won’t change but will it effect significantly to the decrease of the number of shoppers. Without providing evidence that this is the only factor that caused the change in the number of shoppers, the author cannot convincingly conclude that shoppers are not likely to come because of skaters.
Thirdly, the memo must ask whether the opinion was the major opinion or not just some minor people’s thought. Yet the memo provides no evidence that actually shoppers really felt the increase and weren’t willing to come because of it. It might be just only the thought of the central plaza president whom is concerned about their business crisis, to wish it’s not due to his or her administration. Or perhaps, the people who think like that could actually not be majority but minority of shoppers and the plaza might misconstrue the minor opinions to be the major opinion. Without providing evidence as to how the vandalism and litter.
In sum, the memo is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it, the author must provide better evidence of the real relationship and its effect between the increase of skaters and the decline of business profit. To better assess the author’s conclusion, we would need to know more about did really vandalism and litter increased as a major opinion of the shoppers or was it just minor opinion pretending to be all their voices.
- In order for any work of art—for example, a film, a novel, a poem, or a song—to have merit, it must be understandable to most people. 53
- ARGUMENT-The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of marketing at Dura-Sock, Inc."A recent study of our customers suggests that our company is wasting the money it spends on its patented Endure manufacturing process, which ensures that our 92
- Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field. 66
- Argument Topic: "The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company. "According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced 29
- Claim: Knowing about the past cannot help people to make important decisions today.Reason: The world today is significantly more complex than it was even in the relatively recent past.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or 66
Essay evaluation report
flaws:
Something wrong with the argument 3.
Need to argue against the conclusion always. For this topic it is:
Thus, we recommend that the city prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. If skateboarding is prohibited here, we predict that business in Central Plaza will return to its previously high levels.
---------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 559 350
No. of Characters: 2647 1500
No. of Different Words: 229 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.862 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.735 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.466 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 191 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 139 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 89 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 38 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.304 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.574 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.478 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.31 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.497 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.107 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 301, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...strue it as an advent of a new art style , and that people might want to enjoy mor...
^^
Line 5, column 520, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Still,
... days as shops usually open on daytime. Still the fact that skaters increased won&apo...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, if, may, really, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, third, thirdly, as to, for example, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 12.9520958084 162% => OK
Conjunction : 27.0 11.1786427146 242% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 19.0 13.6137724551 140% => OK
Pronoun: 45.0 28.8173652695 156% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 73.0 55.5748502994 131% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2746.0 2260.96107784 121% => OK
No of words: 556.0 441.139720559 126% => OK
Chars per words: 4.93884892086 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.85588840946 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65393815499 2.78398813304 95% => OK
Unique words: 237.0 204.123752495 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.426258992806 0.468620217663 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 846.9 705.55239521 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.67365269461 358% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 10.0 4.22255489022 237% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.7373401225 57.8364921388 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.391304348 119.503703932 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.1739130435 23.324526521 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.52173913043 5.70786347227 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.152172692986 0.218282227539 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0478878029651 0.0743258471296 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0574919902612 0.0701772020484 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0984904197194 0.128457276422 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0584170688761 0.0628817314937 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.3550499002 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.67 12.5979740519 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.75 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 98.500998004 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.