According to the business manager, it is argued that their Folk on the Air program will convert their present emphasis on Latino and world music to traditional American folk music just as before. In the memo, it is the complaints of many long-term supporters and criticism from a local newspaper that prompt them to make the decision. Even if their apprehension seems sound and indeed, they need to change their existing mode, however, more available evidence is needed to reinforce the validity of the argument.
First of all, the identities of their long-term supporters who grumbled about their un-Ameircan partiality should be given in detail. To be specific, information about their races, ages, etc. should be illustrated. If those complaints, though many, merely came from some conservative, elderly white people who accounts for only a small proportion of their long-time supporters, then their new resolution might be inappropriate. Only through a full grasp of their listeners' requirements and thoughts could they reform their program properly. Therefore, it is necessary to provide more details about who grumbled so that the soundness of the argument could be judged.
Besides, another piece of evidence about the attributes of the so-called local newspaper is wanting. Even if the memo mentions an editorial critical of shift in programming, it remains to estimate whether such criticism is useful and essential. We could understand that the program endeavors to impede any opposing publicity from arising. Yet if the newspaper was inconsequential in most households of the local society or just absolutely recreation-oriented, there might be little value for the program to take such saying into account. In contrast, once the newspaper proves to play a significant role in shaping the views of local people, supporters of the radio included, if any, then the argument could be quite reliable. But what counts most is that the loss of the characteristics of the newspaper should be figured out.
In addition, the argument needs to offer more evidence about why they resolve to change their mode in this way-i.e., back to the one which allocate more time to traditional American folk music. Since it is not cogent that the program transforms in this way just because many complaints and some criticism from a local press. Why could they alter to mode into another, such as equally divide to time for traditional and un-American music. Therefor, more information about why they choose so would benefit supporting that the new-to-come mode is the most appropriate way.
Based on the evidence above, the argument would be enhanced to a convincing one by providing more information about supporters who complained, the local newspaper and why they choose to mode in the new way.
- TPO22 – Independent: A/D? Teachers should not make their political or social views known to students in classroom. 76
- For the past year, as part of an effort to broaden our supporter base, our Folk on the Air program has allocated less time to traditional American folk music and more time to Latino music and world music. In recent months, many long-term supporters of our 66
- TPO23 – Independent: A/D? In today's world, it is more important to work quickly and risk making mistakes than to work slowly and make sure that everything is correct. 90
- "For the past year, as part of an effort to broaden our supporter base, our Folk on the Air program has allocated less time to traditional American folk music and more time to Latino music and world music. In recent months, many long-term supporters of ou 66
- TPO21 – Independent: A/D? For success in a future job, the ability to relate well to people is more important than studying hard in school. 97
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 90, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...ibutes of the so-called local newspaper is wanting. Even if the memo mentions an editorial...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, first, however, if, so, then, therefore, in addition, in contrast, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 28.8173652695 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 67.0 55.5748502994 121% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2351.0 2260.96107784 104% => OK
No of words: 449.0 441.139720559 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.23608017817 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.60321845022 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92289934121 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 204.123752495 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.501113585746 0.468620217663 107% => OK
syllable_count: 731.7 705.55239521 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.471057884232 212% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.3165976592 57.8364921388 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.55 119.503703932 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.45 23.324526521 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.1 5.70786347227 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => 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: 0.189571919372 0.218282227539 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0583480326367 0.0743258471296 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0716057104925 0.0701772020484 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.117290447045 0.128457276422 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0794821711535 0.0628817314937 126% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 14.3799401198 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.41 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.81 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 116.0 98.500998004 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.