The author in the article claims Prunty County should follow what Butler County had done in order to improve the safety in highways. Though the instruction seems plausible at first glance, more specific evidence needed for fortifying his points.
To start with, the writer believes that Bulter County had successfully decreased the accidents during past five years because of the policy to increase lane widths, resurface rough highways and revise the visibility at some treacherous intersections. However, we need to know the exact number of the car incidents for the comparison. Maybe there were only 10 cars passed through the highway per day in Bulter County; and 25 percents fewer reported accidents definitely cannot represent the policy is impeccable. Even if there are thousands of cars flew through the lane everyday, we still need to evaluate the details such as how they define a car accident. Maybe the lawmaker in Bulter County wanted to get promoted, so he tried to remove some of trivial accidents. Thus, unless we get the real number of car accidents and comprehend the way of detecting accidents, we cannot conclude the policy is successful that quickly.
In addition, the author maintains lowering the speed in highway can not lessen the accidents because the vehicle accidents were not mitigated in the last year. However, we have to know more about why the car accidents are still the same as previous one in the first place. Maybe not every driver knew the new policy had been executed, so they kept the original speed on the freeway, which led to more accidents. After the regulation campaign promoted widely, the car incidents might fall down swiftly. Besides, it takes five years for Bulter County to acclaim their policy is effective. Similarly, the Prunty County should test the new regulation for longer to substantiate it fails or not. One year is too short to draw a conclusion.
Moreover, the policy in Bulter County may not be the perfect fit for Prunty County. Maybe the lane in the Prunty County is already wide, it's useless to enlarge it. In terms of improving the dangerous intersections, maybe it is Bulter County that has much more circuitous roads that needed to be warned. However, there are only straight roads in Prunty County. Even if the, it will not help on improving the safety in freeway. Therefore, we need to compare more difference between two counties in order to make better decisions.
To sum it up, despite the good intention for the proposal, we still need more information about why the policy in Prunty did not work, what makes the regulation in Bulter County so successful and how different the two counties are in order to make the idea more convincing
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 457 350
No. of Characters: 2205 1500
No. of Different Words: 225 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.624 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.825 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.461 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 169 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 103 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 76 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 50 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.773 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.15 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.727 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.308 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.498 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.124 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 571, Rule ID: EVERYDAY_EVERY_DAY[3]
Message: 'Everyday' is an adjective. Did you mean 'every day'?
Suggestion: every day
...thousands of cars flew through the lane everyday, we still need to evaluate the details ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 370, Rule ID: THE_PUNCT[1]
Message: Did you forget something after 'the'?
...traight roads in Prunty County. Even if the, it will not help on improving the safet...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, first, however, if, may, moreover, similarly, so, still, therefore, thus, in addition, such as, to start with, in the first place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 13.6137724551 37% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 55.5748502994 106% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 16.3942115768 55% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2268.0 2260.96107784 100% => OK
No of words: 457.0 441.139720559 104% => OK
Chars per words: 4.96280087527 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62358717085 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.56739336637 2.78398813304 92% => OK
Unique words: 232.0 204.123752495 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.507658643326 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 708.3 705.55239521 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.6739512068 57.8364921388 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.090909091 119.503703932 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7727272727 23.324526521 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.5 5.70786347227 114% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
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: 0.202415812564 0.218282227539 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0631858437958 0.0743258471296 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0509972627333 0.0701772020484 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.118688369283 0.128457276422 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0294835539863 0.0628817314937 47% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 14.3799401198 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.3550499002 123% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.49 12.5979740519 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.98 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 98.500998004 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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.