Recent incursions by deep-sea fishermen into the habitat of the Madagascan shrimp have led to a significant reduction in the species population. With the breeding season fast approaching, the number of shrimp should soon begin to increase. Nonetheless, the population should not return to the levels before the fishing boats arrived. Because this trend is expected to continue over the next several years, the Madagascan shrimp will quickly become an endangered species.
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.
The argument that continued fishing of Madagascan shrimp will lead the shrimp to become endangered is flawed in many ways.
The author makes several assumptions that need to be proven before this assumption can be made. For example, the premise that the fisherman are responsible for a significant reduction in the population needs to be proven. It is possible that other causes might be contributing to a decrease in population. Increase in water temperatures or reduction in food supply are two possible reasons a shrimp population might decline, and neither of those have anything to do with the deep-sea fishermen.
Even if we accept that the decline in population is due to the fisherman, the author also asks us to accept that the population will not return to normal levels even after breeding season. Information needs to be provided that illustrates why that might be the case. Data from previous years showing an overall decline in the population of shrimp would make this a stronger assertion. Otherwise, we cannot assume that the breeding numbers do not offset the fishing numbers.
The author makes another logical leap by asserting that if this trend continues, the shrimp will quickly become an endangered species. The author does not provide the population of shrimp, so it is unknown how close, if they are close at all to becoming endangered. It is possible that there is such an abudance of shrimp that they are causing negative impacts on other species. It is possible that even with a sharp decline, the number of shrimp will still by much higher than endangered.
In conclusion, the author asserts that the population of the shrimp is reducing, and that the fault lies with the fisherman. The author also states that their numbers will increase with the breeding season, but not enough to make up for the loss, and finally the author argues that this will cause the shrimp to become endangered. Before asking the reader to agree with these assertions, the author must provide more evidence showing a relationship between the fisherman and the population, a gradual decline even after breeding season, and how close the shrimp are to becoming endangered. Without these pieces of information, the argument remains faulty.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-09-15 | Deepanshu Dewangan | 37 | view |
| 2019-09-13 | bharadwaj98 | 65 | view |
| 2019-09-13 | solankis304 | 23 | view |
| 2019-09-03 | aneela | 23 | view |
| 2019-08-27 | Lutfor Rahman Rony | 58 | view |
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college.Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting yo 58
- The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station."Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news. During this period, most of the comp 69
- Universities should require students to take courses only within those fields they are interested in studying.Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting 66
- Recent incursions by deep-sea fishermen into the habitat of the Madagascan shrimp have led to a significant reduction in the species population. With the breeding season fast approaching, the number of shrimp should soon begin to increase. Nonetheless, th 50
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 371 350
No. of Characters: 1834 1500
No. of Different Words: 171 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.389 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.943 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.565 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 147 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 98 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 64 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 40 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.824 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.305 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.412 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.353 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.577 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.104 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, if, so, still, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 28.8173652695 118% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 55.5748502994 85% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1883.0 2260.96107784 83% => OK
No of words: 371.0 441.139720559 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.07547169811 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38877662729 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67241668588 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.471698113208 0.468620217663 101% => OK
syllable_count: 583.2 705.55239521 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.7025755948 57.8364921388 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.764705882 119.503703932 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8235294118 23.324526521 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.58823529412 5.70786347227 63% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.198641271775 0.218282227539 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0683130703803 0.0743258471296 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0511437132963 0.0701772020484 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.120692010092 0.128457276422 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0286999455632 0.0628817314937 46% => 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: 13.4 14.3799401198 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.08 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 98.500998004 81% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => 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.