The argument compares the dental health of the children living in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal to the children living in the suburban areas in the United States. The argument makes plain vanilla assumptions in reaching the conclusion. The argument makes a straightforward conclusion about the importance of dental care without analysing the elements of the study.
First and foremost, the study fails to perform a due diligence and analyse if the groups are similar enough for the comparison to be made. For example, it is possible that the lifestyle of the children is starkly different in the two regions. The argument does not account for this, and could have been stronger by questioning if the eating habits of the two groups were similar. For instance, the children living in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal might not be as exposed to sweets, chocolates, carbonated drinks, coffees as the children living in the US suburban areas. This in urn could be a reason for lower levels of tooth decay in the former compared to the latter.
Secondly, there is no mention in the argument about the access of water quality in the two regions. Reports have shown that water quality affects enamel of the teeth and might have a significant noxious affect on the dental health of an individual. The argument is futile without providing any analysis if the water in the Himalayan region is pristine and therefore possibly purer as compared to the processed water of the suburban ares of the United States.
Additionally, the argument fails to realise that the two regions are geographically too far away and is possible fir them to have access to resources very different in quality. The Himalayan region in Nepal might have access to more organic food, thus causing lesser oral hygiene problems compared to the suburban areas of United States consuming processed food.
The argument falls flat without considering the gaps in the reporting of the study. The argument fails to cross-check if the water quality of the two regions indeed differed or not. It would have been stronger if the argument considered the questions mentioned above before reaching a baseless conclusion without any support.
- Governments should invest as much in the arts as they do in the military.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and suppor 66
- "Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increasingly more time to covering national news and less time to covering weather and local news. During the same time period, most of the complaints we received from viewers were concerned wit 63
- 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 24
- The following was presented as part of a business plan by Apex Corporation."To answer the increased demand for artisan coffee, Apex Corporation is releasing a new line of coffee, "Gourmet Select." Apex Corporation will first introduce the coffee into majo 18
- The best leaders are those who encourage feedback from the people whom they lead. 83
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- duplicated to argument 1. need to argue:
'...see a dentist an average of 1.25 times per year.'
// an average of 1.25 times per year (see a dentist) doesn't mean they come for teeth decay.
argument 3 -- duplicated to argument 1. Need to argue against the conclusion always. For this topic it is:
Thus, regular dental care is not helpful in preventing tooth decay.
----------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 365 350
No. of Characters: 1810 1500
No. of Different Words: 161 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.371 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.959 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.614 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 146 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 107 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 76 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 35 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.812 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.645 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.562 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.394 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.559 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.109 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 247, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...assumptions in reaching the conclusion. The argument makes a straightforward conclu...
^^^
Line 5, column 204, Rule ID: AFFECT_EFFECT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'effect'?
Suggestion: effect
...th and might have a significant noxious affect on the dental health of an individual. The...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 304, Rule ID: ANALYSIS_IF[1]
Message: Did you mean 'of'?
Suggestion: of
...s futile without providing any analysis if the water in the Himalayan region is pr...
^^
Line 5, column 382, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[3]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
...s pristine and therefore possibly purer as compared to the processed water of the ...
^^
Line 8, column 85, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...the gaps in the reporting of the study. The argument fails to cross-check if the wa...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, for example, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 13.6137724551 22% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 9.0 28.8173652695 31% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 55.5748502994 97% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1852.0 2260.96107784 82% => OK
No of words: 365.0 441.139720559 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.07397260274 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37092360658 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67134386844 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 167.0 204.123752495 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.457534246575 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 581.4 705.55239521 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.0090976949 57.8364921388 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.75 119.503703932 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8125 23.324526521 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.6875 5.70786347227 82% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.308738662378 0.218282227539 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.10087207674 0.0743258471296 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.150645676061 0.0701772020484 215% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.170545262396 0.128457276422 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0958457810788 0.0628817314937 152% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.58 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 98.500998004 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.