The following appeared in a memo from the chairperson of the school board in the town of Saluda.
“for the past five years, Mr. Charles Schade has been the music director at Steel City High School, and during that time the school band from Steel City High hast won three regional band competitions. In addition, the quality of the music rehearsal facilities and musical instruments at Steel City High has improved markedly over the past five years. Because of such successes at Steel City High, the Saluda school board should hire Mr. shade to plan and direct the general music education programs for the entire Saluda school system.
The chairperson of Saluda school recommends that it is useful to hire Mr. Charles Schade, the music director at Steel City High School, because he achieved prosperities while directing the musical programs at Steel City High, however , this recommendation can not be accepted because it rests on a number of assumptions all of which are questionable.
First of all the chairperson refers to victory in three regional band competition during Mr. Charles directory. It can not be concluded that this success is only attributable to the director and probably some other factors might help this achievement happen. Moreover, the students are not considered, talented students with intrinsic abilities might have had a big role in the band. In addition, the success was solely among regional teams and the chairperson fails to consider regional differences between the two schools. The region of the schools in which the Salunda school is located might be weak or amateur in musical competitions so victory over such teams might not be related to Mr. Charles.
The other problem is that improvement in music rehearsal facilities and musical instruments is ascribed to the director. The first point to touch on in this case is that this improvement probably derives from the university budget dedicated to the music programs. In addition, it is mentioned that this change has occurred after five years so it is not a short time for such improvements in facilities. Another assumption which is not considered is that maybe the university planned for these victories the years before the directory of Mr. Charles and the prosperities came from those plannings.
In the final analysis, the recommendation of the chairperson can not be taken to be correct, as it was mentioned in the body paragraphs, it depends on a number of assumptions each of which is questionable and ambiguous. The recommendation can be accepted only if the weaknesses mentioned above are all removed and there must be clear evidence that the prosperity in competition and increase in musical facilities is only attributed to the director, and not some other factors.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 234, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...cal programs at Steel City High, however , this recommendation can not be accepted...
^^
Line 3, column 121, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...nstruments is ascribed to the director. The first point to touch on in this case is...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, may, moreover, so, while, in addition, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 55.5748502994 85% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1789.0 2260.96107784 79% => OK
No of words: 346.0 441.139720559 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.17052023121 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31289638616 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01097991522 2.78398813304 108% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 204.123752495 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.494219653179 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 561.6 705.55239521 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 19.7664670659 61% => 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: 28.0 22.8473053892 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 66.8796597546 57.8364921388 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 149.083333333 119.503703932 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.8333333333 23.324526521 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.33333333333 5.70786347227 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.259770758012 0.218282227539 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0836442377401 0.0743258471296 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0973149608729 0.0701772020484 139% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.163627704829 0.128457276422 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.13169115668 0.0628817314937 209% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.3 14.3799401198 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.06 48.3550499002 89% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.3 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.77 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 98.500998004 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 12.3882235529 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 11.1389221557 119% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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: 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.