"To serve the housing needs of our students, Buckingham College should build a number of new dormitories. Buckingham's enrollment is growing and, based on current trends, will double over the next 50 years, thus making existing dormitory space inadequate. Moreover, the average rent for an apartment in our town has risen in recent years. Consequently, students will find it increasingly difficult to afford off-campus housing. Finally, attractive new dormitories would make prospective students more likely to enroll at Buckingham."
The author make assumption that numbers of students are attending to Buckingham collage are rising and based on this trend, they need more dormitories at campus while the rent of off campus housing and also rent of apartments in town are increasing. It seems the need of students houses in future are becoming greater so the number of dormitories should be doubled through 50 years in order to attract students to enroll at Buckingham more than now. This argument has several flaws and ambiguities which would not persuade readers to accept these reasons for making new dormitories are logical. Author should use details with correct examples to integrate these reasons to plan for building new dormitories.
Students who participated at collage they prefer to find off campus apartments rather than on campus. It is possible for them to share everything with their friends such as rent and food price. They have more freedom without monitoring by on campus director and its regulation. Most dormitories are small in size and have little space for students. They have problems in making privacy at on campus apartments with other students, they want to enjoy their lives while they are studying at collage.
Unlikely, there is no reason to prove if making new dormitories will convince students to enroll at collage in future. Students join collage based on they interests and they fallow majors which commonly presented. They want to learn about specific subject and become educated not necessary attractive dormitories persuade them to participate at Buckingham.
On the other hand, there is no valuable source to demonstrate the number of students will be doubled. For verifying this theory the correct survey with recognizable measure is required.
In conclusion, for convincing the argument to readers the correct measures and logical survey should be examined. This argument has several ambiguities in details and it is not possible to integrate mentioned reasons for consequent the result in this argument.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 299, Rule ID: ADJECTIVE_IN_ATTRIBUTE[1]
Message: A more concise phrase may lose no meaning and sound more powerful.
Suggestion: small
...nd its regulation. Most dormitories are small in size and have little space for students. The...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 109, Rule ID: IN_PAST[1]
Message: Did you mean: 'in the future'?
Suggestion: in the future
... convince students to enroll at collage in future. Students join collage based on they in...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 156, Rule ID: NON3PRS_VERB[2]
Message: The pronoun 'they' must be used with a non-third-person form of a verb: 'interest'
Suggestion: interest
...re. Students join collage based on they interests and they fallow majors which commonly p...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 187, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... with recognizable measure is required. In conclusion, for convincing the argume...
^^^
Line 5, column 262, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...consequent the result in this argument.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, so, while, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 13.6137724551 29% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 55.5748502994 97% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 16.3942115768 37% => More nominalization wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1697.0 2260.96107784 75% => OK
No of words: 323.0 441.139720559 73% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.25386996904 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23936324884 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70188012993 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 204.123752495 80% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.50773993808 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 524.7 705.55239521 74% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 1.0 8.76447105788 11% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.175871602 57.8364921388 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.0625 119.503703932 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.1875 23.324526521 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.875 5.70786347227 68% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.158451233475 0.218282227539 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0556679527551 0.0743258471296 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0554789765371 0.0701772020484 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0850172553276 0.128457276422 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0767613330969 0.0628817314937 122% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 14.3799401198 93% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.17 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.15 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 98.500998004 73% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 12.3882235529 145% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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.