The following appeared as a letter to the editor from a Central Plaza store owner.
"Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central Plaza store owners believe that the decrease in their business is due to the number of skateboard users in the plaza. There has also been a dramatic increase in the amount of litter and vandalism throughout the plaza. Thus, we recommend that the city prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. If skateboarding is prohibited here, we predict that business in Central Plaza will return to its previously high levels."
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.
In the editorial from the local newspaper, it is stated that a prohibition to skateboarding will result in the revival of business in Central Plaza. The author comes to this conclusion by citing that the lack of business is attributed to the increased litter and vandalism supposedly caused by the skaters. However, before this recommendation can be properly evaluated, three questions must be answered.
First of all, how are we to assume that the fall in the number of shoppers is due to the increased popularity in skateboarding? In other words, can the circumstances introduced by the skateboarders be used to make generalizations and predictions about the Plaza's success? It is possible that the two are not related at all-- Perhaps the economy has plummeted over the course of two years and citizens do not have the means to shop as regularly as they were two years prior. Further, there is a possibility that another competing shopping complex has recently opened up nearby, and the customers that once visited Central Plaza are now frequenting the new complex instead. If either of these scenarios has merit, the conclusion drawn in the original argument is significantly weakened.
Secondly, is there any confirmation that the litter and vandalism throughout the Plaza are the skateboarders' fault? In the argument, the author prematurely assumes that the untidiness throughout the plaza is the skateboarders' responsibility. However, this may not be the case. Perhaps new stores/restaurants have opened up in the proximity without garbage cans nearby for people to dispose of their trash. It is also possible that recent social unrest has sparked vandalism all throughout the city, not exclusively the Central Plaza. If the above is true, the argument in the editorial does not hold water.
Finally, even if skateboarding was banned in the Central Plaza, would these restrictions even be followed? Establishing a ban does not necessarily mean that skateboarders will adhere to the new rules. They may continue to spend time around the plaza, nonchalant in response to the newly imposed restrictions. It is also possible that prohibiting the skateboarders may actually have a counterintuitive effect. The ban may cause disruption amongst the skateboarding community, and consequently, they may either protest or deter other citizens from visiting the mall at all, inciting bias or unfair regulations. If hypothetically, either of the two situations above were to occur, then the author's main conclusion would lack foundation.
In conclusion, the argument, as it stands now, is considerably flawed due to its reliance on several unwarranted assumptions. If the author is able to answer the three questions above and offer more evidence (perhaps in the form of a systematic research study), then it would be possible to fully evaluate the viability of a proposed suggestion to prohibit skateboarding in the Central Plaza.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-04-06 | sijan | 53 | view |
| 2023-01-26 | ljh5034 | 78 | view |
| 2022-09-25 | ctoluwasedaniel | 68 | view |
| 2022-06-23 | sag15 | 72 | view |
| 2022-06-19 | Soumyadip Kar | 70 | view |
- All college and university students would benefit from spending at least one semester studying in a foreign country Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the posit 92
- nutrias 61
- Governments should not fund any scientific research whose consequences are unclear Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take In developing a 92
- All too often companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently If companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees such consultants would be unnecessary Write a response in which you discuss 83
- avocados 75
Comments
e-rater score 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: 22 15
No. of Words: 466 350
No. of Characters: 2408 1500
No. of Different Words: 231 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.646 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.167 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.104 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 170 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 137 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 105 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 72 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.182 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.537 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.682 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.289 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.488 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.045 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 213, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'skateboarders'' or 'skateboarder's'?
Suggestion: skateboarders'; skateboarder's
... untidiness throughout the plaza is the skateboarders responsibility. However, this may not b...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, consequently, finally, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, in conclusion, first of all, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 55.5748502994 112% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2472.0 2260.96107784 109% => OK
No of words: 465.0 441.139720559 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.31612903226 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64369019777 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.22360067955 2.78398813304 116% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 204.123752495 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.501075268817 0.468620217663 107% => OK
syllable_count: 780.3 705.55239521 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.2549402258 57.8364921388 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.363636364 119.503703932 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.1363636364 23.324526521 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.36363636364 5.70786347227 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.242632092911 0.218282227539 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.06566686728 0.0743258471296 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0602865680337 0.0701772020484 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.135350254176 0.128457276422 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0379503482735 0.0628817314937 60% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 14.3799401198 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 48.3550499002 86% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 12.5979740519 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.06 8.32208582834 109% => OK
difficult_words: 129.0 98.500998004 131% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 12.3882235529 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.