The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Balmer Island Gazette.
On Balmer Island, where mopeds serve as a popular form of transportation, the population increases to 100,000 during the summer months. To reduce the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians, the town council of Balmer Island should limit the number of mopeds rented by the island's moped rental companies from 50 per day to 25 per day during the summer season. By limiting the number of rentals, the town council will attain the 50 percent annual reduction in moped accidents that was achieved last year on the neighboring island of Seaville, when Seaville's town council enforced similar limits on moped rentals.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
There is a letter mentions that in order to decrease the mopeds accidents when the population increase to 100,000 during the summer vacation, the council of Balmer Island should restrict the number of rented mopeds from 50 per day to 25 per day. The arguer indicates the case that the council successfully reduced the moped accidents by limiting the number of rentals while facing the similar obstacle in the near island of Seaville to support his/her inference. However, there are a few concerns must be addressed.
To begin with, the author did not illustrate the resource of the letter is based on the government or the private statistics and reason that the rental number is undercut by fifty percent off. Besides, there is no clue to connect the relation between the increasing population and the soaring accidents in the summer months. The most dubious fact is that the causing reason and the time period of experience in the Seaville Island. We cannot be sure what had swelled the mopeds accidents and the lasting effect on limiting rental mopeds according to this argument. It could be more convincing to warrant where these statistics come from and the continuous examination of the policy.
On the other hand, it is sure that the accidents would subside by limiting the rental number of mopeds when these accidents were occurred by rental mopeds. Nevertheless, we can only observe the accidents were involved by mopeds and pedestrians. Perhaps the mopeds which result the accidents are brought by the tourists. As the popularity of mopeds, it even can be the possible that these mopeds are bought in Balmer Island. Furthermore, the accidents would arise can be any other reason such as the careless visitors who are too exciting to watch the safety or the terrible system of the road to bear the great population in the summer vacation. Any of these scenarios, if true, would undermine the claim that limiting the number of rental mopeds decrease the accidents. We have to detect the major reason of the accidents.
Finally, the author assumes too hastily that the restricting policy will necessarily result in decreasing accidents based on the experience of Seaville Island last year. Although Balmer Island and Seaville Island are close, still they are completely different two islands: they may have a different culture, geography, and the population. For instance, the diverse studying policies for entering university in America are famous and outstanding; still, these caused a great deal of problems in Taiwan for the reason of the attention on studying in Chinese society. Therefore, the council of Balmer needs to analyze the difference between these two islands and search for the variable measures to descend the accidents.
In conclusion, this argument is unacceptable as it represents. To reinforce the statement, the author would have to show the resource of the statistics and the major reason of the accidents. Additionally, the author must figure out the difference between Balmer Island and Seaville Island to measure the suitability of executing the policy.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 594, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'warranting'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'convince' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: warranting
...s argument. It could be more convincing to warrant where these statistics come from and th...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, finally, furthermore, however, if, may, nevertheless, so, still, therefore, well, while, for instance, in conclusion, such as, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 28.8173652695 94% => OK
Preposition: 68.0 55.5748502994 122% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2597.0 2260.96107784 115% => OK
No of words: 504.0 441.139720559 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15277777778 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.73813722054 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69482648599 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 230.0 204.123752495 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.456349206349 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 815.4 705.55239521 116% => 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
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.4447271487 57.8364921388 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.045454545 119.503703932 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.9090909091 23.324526521 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.63636363636 5.70786347227 134% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 6.88822355289 189% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.293691321229 0.218282227539 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0805590185408 0.0743258471296 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.073800007955 0.0701772020484 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.167009682958 0.128457276422 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0675886839906 0.0628817314937 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 14.3799401198 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.89 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.39 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 117.0 98.500998004 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.