The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine.
"In 1975 a wildlife census found that there were seven species of amphibians in Xanadu National Park, with abundant numbers of each species. However, in 2002 only four species of amphibians were observed in the park, and the numbers of each species were drastically reduced. There has been a substantial decline in the numbers of amphibians worldwide, and global pollution of water and air is clearly implicated. The decline of amphibians in Xanadu National Park, however, almost certainly has a different cause: in 1975, trout — which are known to eat amphibian eggs — were introduced into the park."
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
In the letter to the editor of an environmental magazine, the author highlights that there has been a decline in the population of amphibians in Xanadu National Park. In the letter, the author cites several reasons for this decline. On perusal of the letter it was found that there are apparent lapses in the arguments presented. These gaps are discussed as below:
The author compares the population of amphibians in 2002 to the that in 1975. Although by looking at the numbers, it can be plausible that some species got extinct and disappeared. However, the time gap between the time period of reference is too long. It could have been that while the census was being carried out in 2002, the other three species could be hibernating. It could have been possible that the species must have migrated, seasonal migration perhaps, to some other part of the country and thus would have disappreared during the census.
Moreover, it is elaborated if the same study or methodology of study was used in both 1975 and 2002. The letter fails to give details on the objectives of the study too. Perphas the study in 2002 was related to those four amphibians only and thus didn’t take the other three in account. In such cases, the study will not be representative of the amphibian population in Xanadu National Park.
The author also claims that amphibian population has declined worldwide due to global pollution of water and air. However, the author does not mention anywhere in the letter that the national park has been polluted. It doesnot even mention if pollution affected any particular species and was responsible for its extinction. If it were so, then the decline in population and disapperance of three species could have been justified. However, in the absence of any evidence regarding the pollution of the national park premises, it cannot be correleated.
On the other hand, the author explicitly mentions that decline in amphibian population in Xanadu was due to an amphibian egg eating trout introduced in the park in 1975. In case, if the there were evidence that trout selectively ate the three species that disappreaded by 2002, then the author’s argument would be strenthened.
Thus, in the consideration of some major lapses, it is possible to view the author’s arguments as strong enough to be credible.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-01 | Reetin | 50 | view |
| 2019-11-14 | Captain | 35 | view |
| 2019-10-30 | sushil koirala | 43 | view |
| 2019-09-05 | Krishna Prasad | 50 | view |
| 2019-09-03 | wogns030609 | 50 | view |
- The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine."In 1975 a wildlife census found that there were seven species of amphibians in Xanadu National Park, with abundant numbers of each species. However, in 2002 only four species of am 23
- All parents should be required to volunteer time to their children's schools.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 compe 70
- The following appeared in a magazine article about planning for retirement."Clearview should be a top choice for anyone seeking a place to retire, because it has spectacular natural beauty and a consistent climate. Another advantage is that housing costs 85
- The main benefit of the study of history is to dispel the illusion that people living now are significantly different from people who lived in earlier times.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement 50
- The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a Batavia newspaper."The department of agriculture in Batavia reports that the number of dairy farms throughout the country is now 25 percent greater than it was 10 years ago. During this same time 37
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 391 350
No. of Characters: 1885 1500
No. of Different Words: 178 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.447 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.821 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.661 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 129 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 102 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 71 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 46 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.619 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.744 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.619 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.313 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.567 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.082 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 464, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ve migrated, seasonal migration perhaps, to some other part of the country and th...
^^
Line 7, column 371, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... were so, then the decline in population and disapperance of three species could ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, look, moreover, regarding, so, then, thus, while, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 55.5748502994 101% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1960.0 2260.96107784 87% => OK
No of words: 390.0 441.139720559 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.02564102564 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44391917772 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80006574545 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 204.123752495 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.458974358974 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 609.3 705.55239521 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.22255489022 213% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 31.5481774434 57.8364921388 55% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 98.0 119.503703932 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5 23.324526521 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.3 5.70786347227 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => 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: 0.254874591668 0.218282227539 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0809748602964 0.0743258471296 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0582068041341 0.0701772020484 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.128621480885 0.128457276422 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0625997923107 0.0628817314937 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 14.3799401198 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.3550499002 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.89 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.94 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 98.500998004 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.