Although the following argument seems appealing at first, but upon careful examinations, it is full of flaws. Primarily the argument is based on the assumption that both the countries, Prunty and Butler, are similar, rendering its main conclusion, that undertaking the same kind of road improvement projects that took place in Butler country would improve highway safety, invalid.
Assuming both the countries to be similar to prove the argument right, is not persuasive at all. Maybe the Prunty country already has perfect lane widths, good visibility at intersections and already resurfaced highways but still the number of accidents that happen remain the same. Their maybe other factors that cause the accidents. Firstly, there may be low visibility due to atmospheric conditions like pollution, smog etc. And as a result, people can't see, beyond a few meters, what's in front of them even at low speeds in spite of the warning lights and other warning signs at the dangerous intersections. The argument would have been stronger if it had provided proper stats containing monthly recordings, to differentiate between summers and winters, of air pollution levels along with the visibility.
Moreover, the lack of proper law and order in the country may have led to the breaking of traffic rules and exceeding the speed limit audaciously by the masses. In addition, maybe the current population is impatient due to some tensions, social or political, prevailing in the masses or otherwise likes to break the rules recklessly. Furthermore, the inefficiency on the part of the government and other bodies to take proper actions towards road safety, may have led to non decrease in the number of accidents in the country despite of lowering the speed limits.
Last but not the least, the decrease in the number of accidents reported in the Butler Country may not have been due to the improvements in the highways but due to government actively taking part in initiating informational drives- making advertisements, displaying banners, organizing street plays- to educate its citizens about safety on roads and in making them familiar with the consequences of being impatient and doing reckless driving. Besides, it is quite possible that the traffic conditions may have improved and now there is much less traffic than it existed 5 years back. Or there may have been an inefficiency in reporting or many accidents may have went unreported which explains the 25% decrease in reported accidents. To strengthen the argument, proper stats containing the information about the traffic conditions that existed 5 years ago and that of the present would be required.
As the argument makes several unwarranted assumptions, it fails to make a convincing case that the number of accidents in Prunty Country would decrease after undertaking the same kind of road improvement project that took place in Butler country. If the argument had taken into account all the mentioned gaps, it would have been more persuasive.
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- it is duplicated to the argument 1. can be put in one argument.
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 5 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 483 350
No. of Characters: 2472 1500
No. of Different Words: 242 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.688 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.118 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.764 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 183 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 143 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 101 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 68 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 30.188 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 14.165 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.812 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.338 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.579 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.108 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 453, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...tion, smog etc. And as a result, people cant see, beyond a few meters, whats in fron...
^^^^
Line 3, column 484, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: what's
..., people cant see, beyond a few meters, whats in front of them even at low speeds in ...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 664, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[6]
Message: Note: went is a past participle of "wend". Did you mean 'gone' (past participle of "go")?
Suggestion: gone
...in reporting or many accidents may have went unreported which explains the 25% decre...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, first, firstly, furthermore, if, may, moreover, so, still, then, in addition, in conclusion, kind of, as a result, in spite of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 11.1786427146 179% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 28.8173652695 73% => OK
Preposition: 65.0 55.5748502994 117% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2535.0 2260.96107784 112% => OK
No of words: 483.0 441.139720559 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.24844720497 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68799114503 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85772340848 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 247.0 204.123752495 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.511387163561 0.468620217663 109% => OK
syllable_count: 768.6 705.55239521 109% => 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
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 28.0 22.8473053892 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 87.4347606518 57.8364921388 151% => OK
Chars per sentence: 149.117647059 119.503703932 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.4117647059 23.324526521 122% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.23529411765 5.70786347227 144% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.146635544235 0.218282227539 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0437062083134 0.0743258471296 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0424137077903 0.0701772020484 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.083937680157 0.128457276422 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0236746463548 0.0628817314937 38% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.5 14.3799401198 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.06 48.3550499002 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.47 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.65 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 98.500998004 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 11.1389221557 119% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.