The following is a letter from the parent of a private school student to the principal of that school:
Last year, Kensington Academy turned over management of its cafeteria to a private vendor, Swift Nutrition. This company serves low-fat, low-calorie meals that students do not find enjoyable – my son and several of his friends came home yesterday complaining about the lunch options. While the intent of hiring Swift may have been to cause students to eat healthier foods, the plan is just going to cause students to bring their own, less healthy lunches instead of eating cafeteria food. If Swift is not replaced with another vendor, there will be serious health consequences for Kensington students.
The author has stated that, if Swift Nutrition is not replaced by another vendor, there would be serious health consequences for the students of Kensington Academy. Although the concern by the parent toward the students' health is understandable, the arguments posed are rife with holes! There are several fallacious points that the author has conveniently assumed.
Firstly, the author has assumed that their son's friends who complained about the food, would represent a majority of the students' decision. Does this mean, that she's giving precedence to tasty food over unhealthy food? It may just be so, that this group of friends doesn't enjoy the food, while the vast majority of the school enjoys it. In that case, if the vendor was replaced, it would result in a larger number of disgruntled students! And at the same time the low-fat, low-calorie meals need not necessarily be insipid and not enjoyable. They may just be tasty, and healthy at the same time, which is probably the best possible combination in food one can receive!
Secondly, the author has also assumed that, if students don't like the food being served, they will resort to unhealthy food instead. How can she claim that the students, bringing food from their homes, would necessarily bring in an unhealthy meal?. If in fact the food was not enjoyable, their parents may provide them with a healthy and enjoyable meal from home instead. This would prove the author wrong, since the health condition at the school would most likely ameliorate, rather than exacerbate!
Additionally, the author has also fallaciously believed that, if the health of the students was truly deteriorating, then a further change in vendors would solve this. There is a chance that the new vendor turns out to be even worse than the current one, resulting in further decline in health conditions of students!
Therefore, in order to make her claim more cogent, she must hand in valid proof that a clear majority of the school does not enjoy the meals served at school, by the current caterer. Additionally, she must also present a few cases where the students resorted to unhealthy food. This would then expedite the switch in cafeteria vendors. Finally she must prove that an incoming vendor would provide better quality food, which is healthy!
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-18 | Chayank_11 | 78 | view |
| 2019-12-06 | chapagain08 | 50 | view |
| 2019-11-28 | Walia Farzana | 49 | view |
| 2019-11-10 | Cursed God | 83 | view |
| 2019-10-29 | Vindo | 50 | view |
- The following is a memorandum from the business manager of WLSS television station."Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increasingly more time to covering national news and less time to covering weather and local news. During the s 50
- "According to a recent report by our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen produced movies than in any other year. And yet the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers about specific Super Screen movies ac 16
- Governments should invest as much in the arts as they do in the military. 58
- A recent study indicates that children living in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal have lower levels of tooth decay than children living in suburban areas in the United States, despite the fact that people in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal re 66
- Asthma 3
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 212, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'students'' or 'student's'?
Suggestion: students'; student's
...gh the concern by the parent toward the students health is understandable, the arguments...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 162, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: she's
...students decision. Does this mean, that shes giving precedence to tasty food over un...
^^^^
Line 3, column 266, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... just be so, that this group of friends doesnt enjoy the food, while the vast majority...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 57, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...thor has also assumed that, if students dont like the food being served, they will r...
^^^^
Line 9, column 337, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Finally,
...pedite the switch in cafeteria vendors. Finally she must prove that an incoming vendor ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, firstly, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, while, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.9520958084 147% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 28.8173652695 108% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 55.5748502994 74% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 16.3942115768 24% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1924.0 2260.96107784 85% => OK
No of words: 382.0 441.139720559 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.03664921466 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.42095241839 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55616979133 2.78398813304 92% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 204.123752495 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.523560209424 0.468620217663 112% => OK
syllable_count: 565.2 705.55239521 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 4.96107784431 222% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Interrogative: 1.0 0.471057884232 212% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 2.70958083832 295% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 82.5793372387 57.8364921388 143% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.428571429 119.503703932 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.2857142857 23.324526521 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.64285714286 5.70786347227 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.176606453206 0.218282227539 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0655679029257 0.0743258471296 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.044451312207 0.0701772020484 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.100187077196 0.128457276422 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0209281550794 0.0628817314937 33% => 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: 16.0 14.3799401198 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 48.3550499002 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 12.197005988 103% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.28 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 98.500998004 81% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.