During a recent trial period in which government inspections at selected meat-processing plants were more frequent, the number of bacteria in samples of processed chicken decreased by 50 percent on average from the previous year’s level. If the government were to institute more frequent inspections, the incidence of stomach and intestinal infections throughout the country could thus be cut in half. In the meantime, consumers of Excel Meats should be safe from infection because Excel’s main processing plant has shown more improvement in eliminating bacterial contamination than any other plant cited in the government report
In the Argument, the Author addresses the initiative taken by the government for conducting regular inspections on meat processing plants to check the percentage of bacteria present in chicken. As the consumption chicken with excess percentage of bacteria has reported in the cases of stomach and intestinal infections. However, provision of extra information on excel meats plant in the Argument will strengthen the conclusion given by the author.
Firstly the Argument doesn’t provide any statistical information on the reported cases of stomach and intestinal infections caused by consumption of bacteria contaminated chicken. Provision of number of cases effected due consumption of infected chicken would explain the severity of the situation and number of frequent visits to be conducted on processing plants for reducing the bacterial percentage in chicken.
Secondly the author address that frequent visits from government has reduced the percentage of bacteria in the chicken samples by 50%. Additional information about the process flowed for treating the current samples and the new course of action taken or implemented by the government for treating the bacterial contamination in samples will strengthen the Argument.
Third the Argument never addresses any previous or current status of processing meat of manufactures to compare the improvement exhibited by Excel meats and conclude that it is safe for consumption. Details regarding the process of manufacturing, age of chicken and percentage of bacterial with respect to other manufactures would help in concluding that “Excel Meats” chicken is good for consumption
To strengthen the Argument the author must include details of process followed for manufacturing meat, new rules / amendments done in order to improve the quality of chicken, processing of fresh meat to reduce progress of bacterial contamination will strengthen the Argument.
- 8.The CoffeeCart beverage and food service located in the lobby of our main office building is not earning enough in sales to cover its costs, and so the cart may discontinue operating at GBS. Given the low staff morale, as evidenced by the increase in th 63
- 2.Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 c 50
- 10.The following appeared in a memorandum from the vice president of Gigantis, a development company that builds and leases retail store facilities: Nationwide over the past five years, sales have increased significantly at outlet stores that deal exclusi 63
- When the Apogee Company had all its operations in one location it was more profitable than it is today Therefore the Apogee Company should close down its field offices and conduct all its operations from a single location Such centralization would improve 40
- During a recent trial period in which government inspections at selected meat-processing plants were more frequent, the number of bacteria in samples of processed chicken decreased by 50 percent on average from the previous year’s level. If the governme 50
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, however, regarding, second, secondly, then, third, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 19.5258426966 15% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 11.3162921348 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 4.0 33.0505617978 12% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 58.6224719101 90% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 12.9106741573 170% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1666.0 2235.4752809 75% => OK
No of words: 285.0 442.535393258 64% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.84561403509 5.05705443957 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10876417139 4.55969084622 90% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.16427964251 2.79657885939 113% => OK
Unique words: 131.0 215.323595506 61% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.459649122807 0.4932671777 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 500.4 704.065955056 71% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 6.24550561798 0% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 20.2370786517 44% => 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: 31.0 23.0359550562 135% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 106.064387619 60.3974514979 176% => OK
Chars per sentence: 185.111111111 118.986275619 156% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.6666666667 23.4991977007 135% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.11111111111 5.21951772744 175% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 10.2758426966 29% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.251120246971 0.243740707755 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.124126430589 0.0831039109588 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0589975999323 0.0758088955206 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.158150089251 0.150359130593 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0245095088211 0.0667264976115 37% => 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: 22.0 14.1392134831 156% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 23.09 48.8420337079 47% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 17.7 12.1743820225 145% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.24 12.1639044944 142% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.61 8.38706741573 115% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 100.480337079 80% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.4 11.2143820225 128% => OK
text_standard: 18.0 11.7820224719 153% => 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.