When Stanley Park first opened, it was the largest, most heavily used public park in town. It is still the largest park, but it is no longer heavily used. Video cameras mounted in the park's parking lots last month revealed the park's drop in popularity: the recordings showed an average of only 50 cars per day. In contrast, tiny Carlton Park in the heart of the business district is visited by more than 150 people on a typical weekday. An obvious difference is that Carlton Park, unlike Stanley Park, provides ample seating. Thus, if Stanley Park is ever to be as popular with our citizens as Carlton Park, the town will obviously need to provide more benches, thereby converting some of the unused open areas into spaces suitable for socializing.
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
It seems to be logical, at first glance, to agree with the idea that changing plentiful space areas to other facilities such as a proper place to communicate. However, the argument relies on a couple of less credible evidence or even doubtful assumptions to consolidate its stance. In what follows, I will elaborate on them in details.
The 1st problem with the argument is that recording which was done based on video camera maybe make mistakes. To clarify this point, some camera could not capture picture or records videos in darky or unclear points. Most of the people are eager to go parks in the evening or when they come from their works, so the time when public go to the park is afternoon or night, and at this moment most of the place is not transparent. Hence, the camera could not record any videos or pictures from the people who go to the parks in the night, and this does not mean that the number of people goes to the park are decreased. Also, there are some blind points which the camera could not records or take a picture. For example, behind densely or huge tree or near the column of the walls are types of these points.
Even assuming that the videos camera is accurate and valid, there are other unanswered questions. One of this puzzle is there any correlation between more benchers and peoples’ visiting of parks. That is, maybe there are other facilities in the Carlton Parks which makes it amazing as a contrast with the Stanley parks, and these conveniences are not related to the number of seating place in the parks. For instance, Carlton park may have more entertainments devices for the Children, or it may take more discount for the people who visit the park with their family. Besides, Carlton park may have an additional facility like chess planet or exercise tools close to the benches, and this is not the seating attracts more people to the Carlton, yet the existing other facilities beside seating are the main factors for this issue.
Even if we assume that the number of seating place plays a more important role in peoples’ visiting of parks, there are other flaws towards the number of people who are visiting Stanley parks in contrast with the Clarytone parks. The argument could not provide more information about the area both of the parks are located in those places. To be more precise, maybe there are the people who live around the Stanley parks and the innumerable people who live in the near of the Clayton parks. Since most of the people want to go the nearest parks, the public who live around the Claytone do not keen to go the Stanley parks, and this issue is not related to the diminishing of the Stanley parks popularity. Moreover, there is no additional information about the characteristics of the people who go to both parks. If most of the 50 ones who go to the Stanley parks are juvenile, there will be illogical to increase the number of seat place, as most of the adolescence is not eager to seat and they want to jug, running or walking.
To fully evaluate this argument we require to have more additional data about authors averts. The first piece of information we need is the accuracy of the video camera. We also require to know more about the other factors that are engaged in the connection between seating places and the popularity of parks. Finally, to improve the argument as a whole, it is greatly recommended that to know more about visiting characteristics.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-14 | Kiho Park | 59 | view |
| 2019-10-25 | Sunyoung Cheon | 66 | view |
| 2019-09-04 | smartchin77 | 59 | view |
| 2019-08-30 | Dona Shin | 72 | view |
| 2019-07-23 | Ghader | 42 | view |
- It is better for children to choose jobs that are similar to their parents jobs than to choose jobs that are very different from their parents job 73
- The following appeared in a memo from New Ventures Consulting to the president of HobCo, Inc., a chain of hobby shops."Our team has completed its research on suitable building sites for a new HobCo hobby Shop in the city of Grilldon. We discovered that th 100
- The effectiveness of a country's leaders is best measured by examining the well-being of that country's citizens.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for th 66
- College students should base their choice of a field of study on the availability of jobs in that field.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 66
- 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.Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns 66
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- not exactly. better way: it works for park A, while it may not work for park B.
----------------
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/when-stanley-park-…
----------------------
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: 24 15
No. of Words: 608 350
No. of Characters: 2769 1500
No. of Different Words: 242 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.966 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.554 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.358 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 173 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 125 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 68 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 35 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.333 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.75 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.583 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.312 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.527 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.139 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 678, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'could' requires the base form of the verb: 'record'
Suggestion: record
...blind points which the camera could not records or take a picture. For example, behind ...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 24, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'videos'' or 'video's'?
Suggestion: videos'; video's
...f these points. Even assuming that the videos camera is accurate and valid, there are...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 186, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'knowing'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'require' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: knowing
...cy of the video camera. We also require to know more about the other factors that are e...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, finally, first, hence, however, if, may, moreover, so, as to, for example, for instance, in contrast, in fact, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.6327345309 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 23.0 11.1786427146 206% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 21.0 13.6137724551 154% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 28.8173652695 118% => OK
Preposition: 89.0 55.5748502994 160% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2846.0 2260.96107784 126% => OK
No of words: 608.0 441.139720559 138% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.68092105263 5.12650576532 91% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.9656475924 4.56307096286 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.48555165279 2.78398813304 89% => OK
Unique words: 243.0 204.123752495 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.399671052632 0.468620217663 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 914.4 705.55239521 130% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 7.0 1.67365269461 418% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 9.0 4.22255489022 213% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.5562152739 57.8364921388 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.583333333 119.503703932 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.3333333333 23.324526521 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.54166666667 5.70786347227 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.213430695451 0.218282227539 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0664430191833 0.0743258471296 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0675421126347 0.0701772020484 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.112138511252 0.128457276422 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0819248612907 0.0628817314937 130% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 48.3550499002 113% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.16 12.5979740519 81% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.76 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 98.500998004 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
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.