.
The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of a food distribution company with food storage warehouses in several cities.
"Recently, we signed a contract with the Fly-Away Pest Control Company to provide pest control services at our fast-food warehouse in Palm City, but last month we discovered that over $20,000 worth of food there had been destroyed by pest damage. Meanwhile, the Buzzoff Pest Control Company, which we have used for many years, continued to service our warehouse in Wintervale, and last month only $10,000 worth of the food stored there had been destroyed by pest damage. Even though the price charged by Fly-Away is considerably lower, our best means of saving money is to return to Buzzoff for all our pest control services."
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.
In the given argument, the vice president of a food distribution company concludes that the company should replace the Fly-Away Pest Control Company by the previously assigned Buzzoff Pest Control Company citing a reason of high worth of food damaged in their warehouse in Palm city. The conclusion is based on several premises, which, if true, might indicate that the conclusion holds water. However, as it stands now, the conclusion relies on three unwarranted assumptions, which heavily undermine its plausibility.
First of all, the vice president assumes that the case of Fly-Away Pest Control Company in warehouse in Palm city, last month was a general case and not an exception in itself. What if the case of last month was an exception due to some external factor and probably would not repeat in coming months? There could have been some wheather condition which enhanced the pest problem in that particular month, or also the Fly-Away Pest Control Company could have had a temporary issue with its employees, which might have been solved already. In these cases, if the assumption made by the vice president is not supported with further pieces of evidence or support, the conclusion loses its credibility.
Moreover, the vice president assumes that the case of Palm City warehouse will be applicable in cases of other warehouses in several cities. What if the Fly-Away Pest Control Company is the only capable company who can supply qualified manpower in those other cities and also work under harsh condition. There is no such support provided by the author which would indicate that the case of Palm City will be easily applicable for all the cities without any hindarance. For instance, the proposed company might be a small one and not have that resource and expertise to provide service to the food distribution company in several cities. This might dent the validity of the conclusion.
Finally, the vice president assumes that the high price charged by another pest control company- Buzzoff Pest Control Company will not be an issue in a long run. Maybe the price charged by this company is too high to sustain in a long run and might not justify the saving of extra food in warehouse. The vice president must provide supporting comparative information in order to rightly assume that the higher cost of proposed company will fit well for all the warehouses. Else, the conclusion does not hold water.
To conclude, the vice president must provide further information or pieces of evidence in order to make these above mentioned unwarranted assumption valid and support his conclusion. However, as it stands now, the conclusion seems bleak and hardly plausible enough.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-18 | Technoblade | 63 | view |
| 2023-05-29 | abidek001 | 63 | view |
| 2023-03-02 | 宋致遠 | 82 | view |
| 2023-02-17 | HSNDEK | 68 | view |
| 2022-12-06 | abhikhanna | 70 | view |
- The following memo appeared in the newsletter of the West Meria Public Health Council An innovative treatment has come to our attention that promises to significantly reduce absenteeism in our schools and workplaces A study reports that in nearby East Mer 16
- Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert 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 posi 75
- 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 re 83
- The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of a food distribution company with food storage warehouses in several cities Recently we signed a contract with the Fly Away Pest Control Company to provide pest control services at our fast food w 58
- The following is part of a memorandum from the president of Humana University Last year the number of students who enrolled in online degree programs offered by nearby Omni University increased by 50 percent During the same year Omni showed a significant 58
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 4 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 443 350
No. of Characters: 2200 1500
No. of Different Words: 194 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.588 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.966 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.524 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 157 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 131 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 76 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 52 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.611 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.429 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.359 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.359 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.074 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, may, moreover, so, well, for instance, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.6327345309 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 28.8173652695 76% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 55.5748502994 92% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2247.0 2260.96107784 99% => OK
No of words: 443.0 441.139720559 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.07223476298 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.58776254615 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60347908152 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.44920993228 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 710.1 705.55239521 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.0477382939 57.8364921388 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.833333333 119.503703932 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.6111111111 23.324526521 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.05555555556 5.70786347227 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.373878646013 0.218282227539 171% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.108784617867 0.0743258471296 146% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.112285166594 0.0701772020484 160% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.210150290884 0.128457276422 164% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0925013964714 0.0628817314937 147% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 14.3799401198 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.18 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 98.500998004 95% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => 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.