The following appeared as a letter to the editor from a Central Plaza store owner.
"Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central Plaza store owners believe that the decrease in their business is due to the number of skateboard users in the plaza. There has also been a dramatic increase in the amount of litter and vandalism throughout the plaza. Thus, we recommend that the city prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. If skateboarding is prohibited here, we predict that business in Central Plaza will return to its previously high levels."
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.
The following argument is flawed for many reasons. Primarily there is failure to establish that there is any relationship between the decrease in business and the increase in popularity of skateboarding.
Even though there is a negative correlation between the decrease in the number of shoppers in the Plaza with the increase in the popularity of skateboarding, there is no proof of a direct relationship.The observed decrease in shoppers could be due to a variety of other factors. Economic hardship, for example, could cause a hinder the ability for shoppers to spend money at the Plaza. This would cause a reduction in business despite whether there is an increase or decrease it the popularity of skateboarding. If there were complains against the Plaza about the presence of skateboarders, it would provide proof that skateboarders to blame for the decrease in business.
Decrease is business could very possibly be due to an increase in the amount of litter and vandalism. But to associate this increase to the presence of skateboarding is without merit. If there were any evidence --- maybe security camera footage --- that revealed skateboarders vandalizing or littering within the Plaza, then there would be a valid argument. Provided that there is no proof, it cannot be assumed that the skateboarding community can be blamed for defacement of Plaza property.
Finally, the Central Plaza store owner states that if skateboarding is prohibited here, it is predicted that business in Central Plaza will return to its previous high level. Even if the skateboarders are to blame for the decrease in business, the prohibition of skateboarding would not necessarily increase business to the Plaza. If the vandalism and litter is not properly address, it would still remain. There needs to be proper plans and effort to restore the Plaza of any damages done. The Central Plaza’s prohibition on skateboarding also need to be properly reinforced to prevent the return of skateboarders.
The Plaza store owner’s failure to establish a relationship between an increase in skateboarders and decrease business makes the argument weak.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 203, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...re is no proof of a direct relationship.The observed decrease in shoppers could be ...
^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'finally', 'if', 'may', 'so', 'still', 'then', 'for example']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.269841269841 0.25644967241 105% => OK
Verbs: 0.156084656085 0.15541462614 100% => OK
Adjectives: 0.037037037037 0.0836205057962 44% => Some adjectives wanted.
Adverbs: 0.042328042328 0.0520304965353 81% => OK
Pronouns: 0.015873015873 0.0272364105082 58% => OK
Prepositions: 0.142857142857 0.125424944231 114% => OK
Participles: 0.0396825396825 0.0416121511921 95% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.17321837404 2.79052419416 114% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0396825396825 0.026700313972 149% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.121693121693 0.113004496875 108% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0291005291005 0.0255425247493 114% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00529100529101 0.0127820249294 41% => Some subClauses wanted starting by 'Which, Who, What, Whom, Whose.....'
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2156.0 2731.13054187 79% => OK
No of words: 341.0 446.07635468 76% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.32258064516 6.12365571057 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29722995808 4.57801047555 94% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.395894428152 0.378187486979 105% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.328445747801 0.287650121315 114% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.266862170088 0.208842608468 128% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.137829912023 0.135150697306 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.17321837404 2.79052419416 114% => OK
Unique words: 149.0 207.018472906 72% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.436950146628 0.469332199767 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 43.9305201993 52.1807786196 84% => OK
How many sentences: 16.0 20.039408867 80% => OK
Sentence length: 21.3125 23.2022227129 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.0855291204 57.7814097925 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.75 141.986410481 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.3125 23.2022227129 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.5625 0.724660767414 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 3.58251231527 28% => OK
Readability: 54.1570747801 51.9672348444 104% => OK
Elegance: 2.11111111111 1.8405768891 115% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.45981178531 0.441005458295 104% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.167867490928 0.135418324435 124% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.104297525973 0.0829849096947 126% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.626609921949 0.58762219726 107% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.162208195953 0.147661913831 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.227504129123 0.193483328276 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.093243436933 0.0970749176394 96% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.519219844238 0.42659136922 122% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0726376021866 0.0774707102158 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.326095146246 0.312017818177 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0863587832618 0.0698173142475 124% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.33743842365 60% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.87684729064 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.82512315271 62% => OK
Positive topic words: 5.0 6.46551724138 77% => OK
Negative topic words: 7.0 5.36822660099 130% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.82389162562 35% => OK
Total topic words: 13.0 14.657635468 89% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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: This is not the final score. 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.