The following appeared as a recommendation by a committee planning a ten-year budget for the city of Calatrava.
"The birthrate in our city is declining: in fact, last year's birthrate was only one-half that of five years ago. Thus the number of students enrolled in our public schools will soon decrease dramatically, and we can safely reduce the funds budgeted for education during the next decade. At the same time, we can reduce funding for athletic playing fields and other recreational facilities. As a result, we will have sufficient money to fund city facilities and programs used primarily by adults, since we can expect the adult population of the city to increase."
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The author made a conclusion that there will be enough money to fund city facilities and programs used primarily by adults if certain actions are taken. However, after proper scrutiny, the conclusion is flawed, and more evidence is needed to make the conclusion strong.
First, the author made the statement that last year birth-rate was only one-half that of five years ago. The author failed to let us know the source of this information and how reliable the source is. If the information is from a credible source, one may tend to believe that the birth-rate is reducing. If this is not provided, the conclusion remains flawed.
Secondly, even if the birth-rate is reducing, more evidence is need to know if the birthrate is affecting the population. It’s possible that people might have gone to other cities to give birth because of health benefits and come back to their own city after giving birth. This way birth-rate reduced but population did not. Furthermore, evidence that all the students of the public school are from the city is also needed, It is also possible that children from other cities are students in the schools. Without enough evidence on the population and information of the students, like where they are from, the conclusion remains flawed.
Lastly, the author wants the budget for the school be reduced but the author has failed to provide evidence about the current budget if it is enough before it is now reduced.In conclusion, without these evidences provided, we authors is flawed.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-08-06 | LaurelRogers | 46 | view |
| 2019-07-16 | raolitesh@gmail.com | 86 | view |
| 2018-11-09 | julls.kl | 74 | view |
| 2018-10-16 | Kayode | 43 | view |
| 2018-10-05 | bet | 37 | view |
- We can learn much more from people whose views we share than from people whose views contradict our own.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take 60
- As we acquire more knowledge, things do not become more comprehensible, but more complex and mysterious.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take 50
- The following appeared in a memorandum written by the vice president of Health Naturally, a small but expanding chain of stores selling health food and other health-related products."Our previous experience has been that our stores are most profitable in 95
- Teachers' salaries should be based on their students' academic performance.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling r 50
- The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station."Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news. During this time period, most of the comp 75
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- not exactly
--------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 12 15
No. of Words: 255 350
No. of Characters: 1230 1500
No. of Different Words: 131 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 3.996 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.824 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.466 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 95 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 61 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 45 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 23 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.25 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.908 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.75 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.375 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.591 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.11 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 175, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: In
...f it is enough before it is now reduced.In conclusion, without these evidences pro...
^^
Line 7, column 227, Rule ID: NON3PRS_VERB[2]
Message: The pronoun 'we' must be used with a non-third-person form of a verb: 'author'
Suggestion: author
...n, without these evidences provided, we authors is flawed.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, lastly, may, second, secondly, so, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.9520958084 31% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 28.8173652695 62% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 55.5748502994 52% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1277.0 2260.96107784 56% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 254.0 441.139720559 58% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.02755905512 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.99216450694 4.56307096286 87% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5831122401 2.78398813304 93% => OK
Unique words: 137.0 204.123752495 67% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.53937007874 0.468620217663 115% => OK
syllable_count: 400.5 705.55239521 57% => syllable counts are too short.
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: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 19.7664670659 61% => 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: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.8944304964 57.8364921388 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.416666667 119.503703932 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.1666666667 23.324526521 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.66666666667 5.70786347227 134% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.157830969129 0.218282227539 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0548240770831 0.0743258471296 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0863050331145 0.0701772020484 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0835359846807 0.128457276422 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0546835703328 0.0628817314937 87% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 14.3799401198 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.89 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.6 8.32208582834 91% => OK
difficult_words: 47.0 98.500998004 48% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.