The letter to the editor of Parson City’s local newspaper remarks that Parson City residents accentuated providing a good education more than Blue City residents did. But he just based his opinion on little evidence which was the proportion of overall tax revenues attributed to education fees. His conclusion is not cogent and convincing as lacks of deep insight and specific evidences.
First, differences in the budgetary priority don’t necessarily argue for their different value on education qualities. Blue City may face totally different social situations compared with Parson City. We can conjecture that Blue is a barren agricultural society with little financial income. In this condition, they have to allocate limited resources to other exigent fields. In contrast, if Parson City is an affluent industrial society, they will definitely devote more money to education fields. But this difference cannot support this letter’s conclusion for the crucial reality. Also, fiscal expenditures and education costs are in proportion with local economic levels. That is to say, to cover the faculty costs or the infrastructure maintaining costs, there is no doubt for a certain affluent society to pay more. But the letter’s author doesn’t reveal the developing situations in these two cities. So, lack of specific evidence makes us hard to discern who put more value on education.
Second, when it comes to the same number of residents, the letter’s author also lacks other evidence. He only considers the absolute terms and ignore demographic statics. For example, just like some developed countries, some cities face the problem of aging of the society where youngsters only share a small part of populations. Hence, from primary schools to secondary school, their scales become smaller and need less funds. This could happen in Blue city. So, this letter’s author should do additional researches in demographic, sociological fields to support his assertion.
Third, this letter draws the ethereal judgement from economic aspects which is not scientific and lack consideration of many other convoluted elements. For example, if citizens’ education notions are different, Blue City people put more emphasis on social practices. Knowledge comes from social experience. In this assumption, Blue City government certainly needn’t par more for school education. Also, another element can be teaching methodologies. Progressive teaching ways enhance efficiency which saves labor and financial resources. To verify these conjectures, the letter’s author should do some analysis of two cities’ students academic grades, practical techniques, emotional intelligence and so on to get a comprehensive comparison as solid evidence.
In conclusion, this editor didn’t provide enough evidence to support his judgement and more concrete situations need to be considered.
- The following appeared in a letter to the editor of Parson City s local newspaper In our region of Trillura the majority of money spent on the schools that most students attend the city run public schools comes from taxes that each city government collect 66
- Scientists and other researchers should focus their research on areas that are likely to benefit the greatest number of people
- In order to reverse the recent decline in our profits we must reduce operating expenses at Movies Galore s ten video rental stores Since we are famous for our special bargains raising our rental prices is not a viable way to improve profits Last mon 68
- Some people believe it is often necessary even desirable for political leaders to withhold information from the public Others believe that the public has a right to be fully informed 50
- Scientists and other researchers should focus their research on areas that are likely to benefit the greatest number of people
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 416, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun funds is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...l, their scales become smaller and need less funds. This could happen in Blue city. ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, if, may, second, so, third, for example, in conclusion, in contrast, no doubt, that is to say
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.6327345309 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 55.5748502994 85% => OK
Nominalization: 27.0 16.3942115768 165% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2459.0 2260.96107784 109% => OK
No of words: 433.0 441.139720559 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.67898383372 5.12650576532 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56165014514 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93412174233 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 252.0 204.123752495 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.581986143187 0.468620217663 124% => OK
syllable_count: 769.5 705.55239521 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59920159681 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 4.96107784431 222% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 19.7664670659 137% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.8473053892 70% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.5395029959 57.8364921388 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.0740740741 119.503703932 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.037037037 23.324526521 69% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.37037037037 5.70786347227 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.67664670659 235% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.211735851588 0.218282227539 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0506850306213 0.0743258471296 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0673672147733 0.0701772020484 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.120147827459 0.128457276422 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0659557755291 0.0628817314937 105% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 38.31 48.3550499002 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.37 12.5979740519 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.39 8.32208582834 113% => OK
difficult_words: 136.0 98.500998004 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 12.3882235529 73% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.1389221557 75% => 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 416, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun funds is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...l, their scales become smaller and need less funds. This could happen in Blue city. ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, if, may, second, so, third, for example, in conclusion, in contrast, no doubt, that is to say
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.6327345309 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 55.5748502994 85% => OK
Nominalization: 27.0 16.3942115768 165% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2459.0 2260.96107784 109% => OK
No of words: 433.0 441.139720559 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.67898383372 5.12650576532 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56165014514 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93412174233 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 252.0 204.123752495 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.581986143187 0.468620217663 124% => OK
syllable_count: 769.5 705.55239521 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59920159681 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 4.96107784431 222% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 19.7664670659 137% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.8473053892 70% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.5395029959 57.8364921388 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.0740740741 119.503703932 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.037037037 23.324526521 69% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.37037037037 5.70786347227 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.67664670659 235% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.211735851588 0.218282227539 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0506850306213 0.0743258471296 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0673672147733 0.0701772020484 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.120147827459 0.128457276422 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0659557755291 0.0628817314937 105% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 38.31 48.3550499002 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.37 12.5979740519 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.39 8.32208582834 113% => OK
difficult_words: 136.0 98.500998004 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 12.3882235529 73% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.1389221557 75% => 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.