The editor of a local newspaper sent the following memo to the managing editor of the paper:
“Three years ago when we surveyed our subscribers, they complained about the quality of the reporting and writing in the paper. Since that time, we have made a concerted effort to hire older, more experienced journalists. According to our most recent survey, these changes have made a vast improvement. Not only has our subscriber base grown by 13%, but they also rated us higher on both reporting and writing. Therefore, it is evident that to continue to increase our readership, we should hire the most experienced journalists we can find, and gradually fire our younger, less experienced reporters."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
Although the editor concludes that hiring the most experienced journalists and firing the less experienced reporters will increase the readership, the editor' s argument does not make a cogent case. The argument is rife with holes and assumptions, and thus, not strong enough to make such a claim.
Citing surveys of subscribers, the editor attributes the rise in readership to the experienced journalists. It is not clear, however, the scope and validity of that survey. For example, the survey could have been conducted online, which may have not allowed for an active participation of all the subscribers. The sample may have not been representative of subscribers, asking only those subscribers who are in a particular age group. The survey may have been objective with a score ranging from 0 to 5. We do not know on how the editor interpreted the score to be of high/low quality. Unless the survey is fully representative, valid, and reliable, it can not be used to effectively back the editor' s argument.
Additionally, the editor claims there has been a 13 percent increase in the subscriber base. This may have been due to a decrease in popularity of the rival newspapers. Moreover, there is no information on the actual number of subscribers. This 13 percent increase would have been significant if there had been 10000 subscribers and now there are 11300 subscribers, whereas the increase would be less significant if there were 100 subscribers and now there are 113 subscribers. To strengthen his/her argument, the editor would benefit from including the actual number of subscribers.
The editor' s argument does not justify the claim he has made. While the argument does highlight a possibility, more information is required to warrant any action.
- The editor of a local newspaper sent the following memo to the managing editor of the paper:“Three years ago when we surveyed our subscribers, they complained about the quality of the reporting and writing in the paper. Since that time, we have made a c 50
- The following is a recommendation from the Board of Directors of Monarch Books."We recommend that Monarch Books open a café in its store. Monarch, having been in business at the same location for more than twenty years, has a large customer base because 50
- The following appears in a letter to the editor for the West Lansburg News: "The tufted groundhog lives in the coastal wetlands of West Lansburg. Ancient records suggest that the tufted groundhog once numbered in the millions. Since they were declared a w 50
- Only once one has known real sadness can one feel true happiness 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 reasons and o 75
- The editor of a local newspaper sent the following memo to the managing editor of the paper:“Three years ago when we surveyed our subscribers, they complained about the quality of the reporting and writing in the paper. Since that time, we have made a c 50
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, may, moreover, then, thus, whereas, while, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 13.6137724551 29% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 28.8173652695 38% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 55.5748502994 47% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 9.0 16.3942115768 55% => More nominalization wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1484.0 2260.96107784 66% => OK
No of words: 288.0 441.139720559 65% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.15277777778 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11953428781 4.56307096286 90% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07841825466 2.78398813304 111% => OK
Unique words: 149.0 204.123752495 73% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.517361111111 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 459.0 705.55239521 65% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.9833747191 57.8364921388 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 92.75 119.503703932 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.0 23.324526521 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.5 5.70786347227 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.172259349951 0.218282227539 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0619059467808 0.0743258471296 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0365833870437 0.0701772020484 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0962665266741 0.128457276422 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0447036146613 0.0628817314937 71% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 14.3799401198 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.29 12.5979740519 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.37 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 98.500998004 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.