The author states that a concentrated solution of UltraClean has greater solutions to kill bacteria. However, to make the claim more convincing, the author needs to support several assumptions also strengthen the proposal.
The argument indicates that the UltraClean, liquid antibacterial hand soaps, has a greater reduction in the bacteria than others, supported by the laboratory study. However, the author doesn’t show any evidence that the study from the laboratory is strong to convincing publics, also the study doesn’t support the information in detail to strengthen the proposal. If the company of the UltraClean pays money to the laboratory to make them public a fake study to support the company’s product, many customers would be belied in the dark plot. Likewise, the sample in the laboratory might different in other places that the result may not as strong as in the laboratory that the UltraClean hand soap needs more laboratory to support to make the claim more convincing.
The author also mentions the test of the effect of the UltraClean hand soap in their hospital truly has fewer cases of patient infection than other hospitals. Nevertheless, the hospital's situation and places are in pole apart from the other hospital that the test cannot prove any significant support. Since the patients have different diseases and have a different allergy, the hand soap might have a different influence on the patient. Maybe the patient in the author’s hospital is in light disease and not easily allergic, so the UltraClean can have a significant effect on the patient. On the other hand, other hospital patients might have severe illness and easily allergic that the hand soap won’t have any conspicuous decline in patient infection. Thus, the assumptions cannot prove anything to make people believe.
Even if the UltraClean truly has an outstanding effect to reduce bacteria to enact patients’ infection, the costs of the hand soap in the alternative issue that the author needs to discuss. If the costs of the UltraClean are too high than the alternative hand soap, the hospital cannot support the high amount of money afford to the patient. If the hospital sustains the original hand soap and uses the money to elaborate the facilities in the hospital or hire more clean staffs to let the hospital cleaner to reduce the bacteria, the effect might be remarkable than the author’s assumptions. Therefore, change the hand soap to the UltraClean needs more assumptions to prove.
In conclusion, the authors’ evidence to prove assumptions is too narrow to convincing people that the article needs to address the above assumptions to strengthen the argument.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-09-03 | Lawrence1105 | 50 | view |
- The president suggests that the school of all female should admit males to enhance the school s profit and enrollments However the alumnae disagree with the president s assumption that continuing the school of all female is a better solution To assess tho 55
- Summarize the points made in the lecture being sure to explain how they challenge the specific arguments presented in the reading passage In recent years many frog species around the world have declined in numbers or even gone extinct due to changes in th 66
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement The most important investment for a big company is to improve the efficiency and proficiency of its employees 70
- 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 complain 59
- Imagine that you are in a classroom or a meeting The teacher or the meeting leader says something incorrect In your opinion which of the following is the best thing to do Interrupt and correct the mistake right away Wait until the class or meeting is over 65
Comments
e-rater score report
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: 15 15
No. of Words: 402 350
No. of Characters: 2010 1500
No. of Different Words: 155 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.478 4.7
Average Word Length: 5 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.661 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 142 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 109 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 83 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 54 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.8 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.068 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.867 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.415 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.415 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.17 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 177, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'hospitals'' or 'hospital's'?
Suggestion: hospitals'; hospital's
...than other hospitals. Nevertheless, the hospitals situation and places are in pole apart ...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, likewise, may, nevertheless, so, then, therefore, thus, apart from, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 19.6327345309 36% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 10.0 28.8173652695 35% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 55.5748502994 90% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2065.0 2260.96107784 91% => OK
No of words: 399.0 441.139720559 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.17543859649 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46933824581 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79174146199 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 204.123752495 81% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.413533834586 0.468620217663 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 638.1 705.55239521 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 4.96107784431 0% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => 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: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.8895291857 57.8364921388 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.666666667 119.503703932 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.6 23.324526521 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.93333333333 5.70786347227 139% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.20758483034 158% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 6.88822355289 15% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.224559783641 0.218282227539 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0921181519338 0.0743258471296 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0545568052871 0.0701772020484 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.160469171531 0.128457276422 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0525390942691 0.0628817314937 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 14.3799401198 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 48.3550499002 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.06 12.5979740519 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.17 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 98.500998004 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.