1.1. The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of a manufacturing company.
"During the past year, workers at our newly opened factory reported 30 percent more on-the-job accidents than workers at nearby Panoply Industries. Panoply produces products very similar to those produced at our factory, but its work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. Experts say that fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers are significant contributing factors in many on-the-job accidents. Panoply's superior safety record can therefore be attributed to its shorter work shifts, which allow its employees to get adequate amounts of rest."
Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.
The vice president of manufacturing company in his note makes a dubious comparison about the percentage of incidents occurred in his company with a nearby Panoply Industries; furthermore, by consideration of shaky reference to experts’ idea about the tiredness and lack of sleep, make a conclusion the main reason for the last report about the on-the-job accidents is because of the long working shifts in his company. This conclusion cannot be accepted as it stands since it relied on the series of skeptical clues and for its verification require further explanations which will be discussed in the following paragraphs.
The first issue with the note is about the fallacious comparison of the newly-established company with Panoply Industries, a concrete comparison take place in the case which two cases have the identical situations and parameters till the comparison action takes according to the logic and valid data; otherwise, it would be the comparison of oranges and apples. For instance, in this note the only, identical feature at both industries which is mentioned is the level of hardiness of duty in both company; however, there is no description about the crux factors such as the working condition, Labors’ level of knowledge and expertise about working and handling the machines, or controlling system for possible hazardous in the companies to make the comparison of two companies. If from the mentioned factors, the factor of the level of knowledge and expertise is considered for further consideration, there will be the possibility of a difference between two companies. For instance, the newly-opened company since is in his initial phase of occupation, there is a possibility that the employed worker forces are from a group of people who has no idea about the working and its required techniques. Besides, for the sake of this insufficient information, the on-the-job accidents take places. Therefore, this comparison requires further explanation about the level of expertise and other parameters to get the credits as a reference for comparison.
The second problem is with the experts’ unclear sentence that accounts the tediousness and sleeps deprivation as the substantial factors for the on-the-job hazards; because, other parameters are overlooked with this short and general sentence which may not have the same effect as the fatigue and lack of sleep, but are that much insignificant to be overlooked. For example, one of these parameters is the safety level of working environments for the labors, there is the probability that this factor is not as crucial and the amount rest took by labors; however, the dangerous working condition, regardless of workers’ level of alertness can lead to serious disasters. As long as, there is no information about the safety factor of the working environment at this newly-opened factory, the highlighting of this experts’ sentence as the mere reference for the reasons of the currently-happened accidents in the company is doubtful and unreliable.
Finally, the end of the note the vice-president assumes that the high-level of safety index in Panoply Industries is for the sake of an hour shorter working shift and restful working forces in this company; which is shaky and skeptical. Even premised that the fatigue and loss of alertness are main reasons of the occurred hazards in the company, there is clue and evidence that this one-hour shorten from the working shift will be allocated for the sleep by the labors, and they do not spend it for their individual chores. For the sake of lacking guarantee about this deviation, this surmise cannot be accepted too.
To wrap it up, all the aforementioned reasons and evidence explicitly depict the dubious of the note its requirement for further explanation.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-06-27 | evanlu | 73 | view |
| 2019-06-12 | Gh.Ne | 82 | view |
| 2017-07-27 | roncy | view | |
| 2016-08-24 | Divya Chalise | 79 | view |
| 2016-08-24 | darshanchalise | 50 | view |
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Technology has made children less creative than they were in the past.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 83
- tpo48 80
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Younger school student children (age five to ten) should be required to study art and music in addition to math science, history, and language. 70
- To remain happy and optimistic when you fail is more important than achieving success 13
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Students who keep their rooms neat and organized will be more likely to succeed than students who do not 81
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 15 15
No. of Words: 606 350
No. of Characters: 3118 1500
No. of Different Words: 247 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.962 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.145 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.963 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 227 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 194 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 127 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 105 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 40.4 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 17.118 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.367 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.596 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.071 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, look, may, second, so, therefore, for example, for instance, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.6327345309 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 23.0 11.1786427146 206% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 28.8173652695 118% => OK
Preposition: 86.0 55.5748502994 155% => OK
Nominalization: 26.0 16.3942115768 159% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3208.0 2260.96107784 142% => OK
No of words: 606.0 441.139720559 137% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.29372937294 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.96155895361 4.56307096286 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.11798406951 2.78398813304 112% => OK
Unique words: 259.0 204.123752495 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.427392739274 0.468620217663 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1021.5 705.55239521 145% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => 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: 40.0 22.8473053892 175% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 105.693771497 57.8364921388 183% => OK
Chars per sentence: 213.866666667 119.503703932 179% => OK
Words per sentence: 40.4 23.324526521 173% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.26666666667 5.70786347227 145% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.106153560877 0.218282227539 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0410545394307 0.0743258471296 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0370979562705 0.0701772020484 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0613017628893 0.128457276422 48% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0375167083553 0.0628817314937 60% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 23.7 14.3799401198 165% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 22.42 48.3550499002 46% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.1628742515 181% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 20.1 12.197005988 165% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.29 12.5979740519 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.5 8.32208582834 114% => OK
difficult_words: 149.0 98.500998004 151% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 28.5 12.3882235529 230% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 18.0 11.1389221557 162% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
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.