The author in an argument concludes that in order to revitalize the city once more planning department of the city should take action similar to that of taken 10 years ago. The author in an argument assumes that ten years ago, as a part of a urban renewal program in the city, the city adopted for industrial use a large area on severely standard housing. After implementation such program it come to know that crimes rate in the area declined, also property tax revenues for the whole city decreased. The author also assumes that planning department of the city can implement such strategy or program again on nearby free space, as people can find refuge for their family since alternate houses and apartment till unoccupied. An argument has some unanswered question and hence, seems to be dubious. The author can strengthen it by providing more evidences. The argument has several serious flaws in it.
Firstly, the author in an argument assume fallacy that one program applicable and find effective ten years ago will implementable today also. While it sometimes true, not always. The conditions, population of the city, peoples behavior, their likes and dislikes, behavior, people’ needs also varies according to tailor in era or period. An argument has lack of population data, and some other characteristics of an area which may find effective to draw valuable conclusion.
Secondly, the author in an argument wrongly uses correlation proves causality. It is mentioned in an assumption that after implementation of urban renewal program in the city, it comes to know that crime rate decrease also proper tax increased. The author fails to provide cogent evidence that only such program is responsible to lower crime rates in an area. Moreover, there is no any relation between declining crime rate or enhancement in property tax. It may be a possibility that other factor causes decline in crime rate such as increase in police force, improvement in people’ behavior in the society.
Moreover, the author ignores a case that after few years people who lose their apartments and houses for second time implementation of a program may vagabond and homeless due to external factors. In addition, people who losses there houses or flats feel adaptable in previous area which went under program and would discontent due to unsuitability of resources, which may leads to bulk protest by rally of people who homeless because of their houses went under program.
In summary, an argument consist of many unanswered question, application of fallacies and lack of proof in relationships. The author in an argument wrongly uses fallacies such as thing applicable in past will also applicable to present or future, also, wrongly uses correlation proves causality. The author can make his conclusion well sounding and compelling by providing cogent evidences, well entrench relationships, statistical data of population ten years ago and present, people’ behavior in a society in past and today, etc. If author involves such data and details in his argument it will more corroborative and attractive.
- Is it better to enjoy your money when you earn it, or is it better to save for some time in the future? 70
- Do you agree or disagree with: a student must like a teacher in order to learn from the teacher.73
- It is more important for student to read books about real events than it is for them to read novels.70
- Claim: Universities should require every student to take a variety of courses outside the student's major field of study.Reason: Acquiring knowleadge of various academic disciplines is the best way to become truly educated.66
- Leaders are created by the demands that are placed on them.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position,54
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 241, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
...ssumes that ten years ago, as a part of a urban renewal program in the city, the ...
Line 1, column 394, Rule ID: IT_VBZ
Message: Did you mean 'comes'?
...g. After implementation such program it come to know that crimes rate in the area de...
Line 3, column 137, Rule ID: ALSO_SENT_END
Message: 'Also' is not used at the end of the sentence. Use 'as well' instead.
Suggestion: as well
... ten years ago will implementable today also. While it sometimes true, not always. T...
Line 3, column 172, Rule ID: ADVERB_WORD_ORDER
Message: The adverb 'always' is usually not used at the end of a sentence.
...oday also. While it sometimes true, not always. The conditions, population of the city...
Line 5, column 380, Rule ID: NOW
Message: Did you mean 'now' (=at this moment) instead of 'no' (negation)?
...me rates in an area. Moreover, there is no any relation between declining crime ra...
Line 7, column 414, Rule ID: WHO_NOUN
Message: A noun should not follow "who". Try changing to a verb or maybe to 'who is a homeless'.
Suggestion: who is a homeless
...eads to bulk protest by rally of people who homeless because of their houses went under prog...
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, hence, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, well, while, in addition, in summary, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 19.6327345309 25% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 11.1786427146 170% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 55.5748502994 126% => OK
Nominalization: 31.0 16.3942115768 189% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2618.0 2260.96107784 116% => OK
No of words: 502.0 441.139720559 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.21513944223 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.7334296765 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87839162227 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 239.0 204.123752495 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.47609561753 0.468620217663 102% => OK
syllable_count: 844.2 705.55239521 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 16.0 8.76447105788 183% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.4328229494 57.8364921388 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.0 119.503703932 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8181818182 23.324526521 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.5 5.70786347227 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.206106742009 0.218282227539 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0647991198088 0.0743258471296 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0908738842546 0.0701772020484 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.11347119828 0.128457276422 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0969702466314 0.0628817314937 154% => OK
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.3550499002 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.85 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 131.0 98.500998004 133% => 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
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.
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 502 350
No. of Characters: 2535 1500
No. of Different Words: 225 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.733 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.05 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.75 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 187 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 143 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 104 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 61 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.905 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.69 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.762 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.338 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.531 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.085 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5