As the traffic situation in Waymarsh is worsened, in order to mitigate the traffic situation, the author of this argument proposed to follow the methods espoused by the city of Garville. It is clear to understand that the author suggested such proposal, as it is only logical to apply a method which has already been successful elsewhere, but the argument is rife with holes and assumptions. Before applying such methods, it would definitely require more thoughts and information, thus not strong enough to implement the policy adopted by Garville in Waymarsh.
By contrasting a three years old state traffic survey with a current one, the author pointed out the average time has significantly increasing for commuters to reach their work destinations. It is not clear however, the scope and validity of the survey. For example, the survey could have asked the resident the time it took them to reach work on a weekend not the weekdays, which would significantly lower the commuters average driving time. The survey does not cover the number of population or the economic state of these years. It could be possible that the number of people has risen significantly and number of motor vehicles gone up with it, which is causing the traffic to increase. Further, it is also important to look for the infrastructure’s growth of these past three years. For example, new factories or even stadium could have been built without the adequate number of parking spots which is forcing the commuters to park on the streets. Geological factors also should be in consideration, like is there any major change in the area, any new tourist spot attracting tourist, or any major natural calamity caused roads and bridges damages, for what the town council are suggesting new roads building. Unless the survey is fully representative, reliable and valid, it cannot be used to effectively back the author arguments.
Additionally, the author implies to adopt the policy of Garville town to reduce the traffic problems in Waymarsh town, but without any strong data to support this proposal. It has not stated the comparability of these both towns. The author proposed his idea by stating that people of Garville town told him/her the commuting time has fallen by applying the new policy, but the number of people has not been mentioned. It could be five or even hundred. The argument also said the pollution levels have also gone down after implementing the ride sharing policy, but it cannot be attributed as the sole reason in the reduction of pollutions, there can be many other factors affect this cause.
Examining all the various angles and factors involves with implementing the ride sharing policy of Garville town to reduce the traffic issue, the argument does not justify the policy will do equally well for Waymarsh towm. While the proposal does highlight a solution, more information is required to warrant any action.
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, look, so, thus, well, while, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2440.0 2260.96107784 108% => OK
No of words: 483.0 441.139720559 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05175983437 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68799114503 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7272621668 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 238.0 204.123752495 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.492753623188 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 765.0 705.55239521 108% => 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: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.8909269932 57.8364921388 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.421052632 119.503703932 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.4210526316 23.324526521 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.36842105263 5.70786347227 59% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.151214553157 0.218282227539 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0499292080603 0.0743258471296 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0496232561973 0.0701772020484 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0800338886227 0.128457276422 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0450854133895 0.0628817314937 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 14.3799401198 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.31 12.5979740519 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.9 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 123.0 98.500998004 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => 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
---------------------
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.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, look, so, thus, well, while, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2440.0 2260.96107784 108% => OK
No of words: 483.0 441.139720559 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05175983437 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68799114503 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7272621668 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 238.0 204.123752495 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.492753623188 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 765.0 705.55239521 108% => 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: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.8909269932 57.8364921388 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.421052632 119.503703932 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.4210526316 23.324526521 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.36842105263 5.70786347227 59% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.151214553157 0.218282227539 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0499292080603 0.0743258471296 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0496232561973 0.0701772020484 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0800338886227 0.128457276422 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0450854133895 0.0628817314937 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 14.3799401198 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.31 12.5979740519 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.9 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 123.0 98.500998004 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => 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
---------------------
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.