The author of the passage claims that the population of arctic deer is declining and cause for this decline is that deer are not able to follow their age-old migration patterns. For the support of this argument, the author has cited evidence such as reports from local hunters and recent global warming trends. On a cursory glance, these evidences might seem convincing but on deeper examination, they are rife with flaws and loopholes.
First, the creditability of the reports by local hunters is questionable. According to them, arctic deer’s population is declining. It might be possible that the calculation by hunters is itself erroneous. Hunters might have access only to the wild till hunting area, and they would count the deers within this area and deers outside the region will remain uncounted. Thus, deer’s population calculation is unwarranted and therefore reports of local hunters do not give the best evidence to support author’s argument.
Furthermore, Global warming trends might not necessarily mean that they are valid for the arctic region too. If these global warming trends are congruent with the arctic weather variation then it will support the author’s argument. But if global trends are not representative for the arctic region then this evidence would hold no value for author’s claim.
Finally, the author attributes the decline of deer’s population to them not being able to follow their age-old migration pattern. While the author has failed to consider other possible reasons leading to deer’s population decline. For example, there might be an increase of predatory animals in the region that would be feeding on deer or the industries nearby have polluted the region so much so that deers are dying due to the consumption of toxic waste. Hence, it can’t be firmly concluded that the inability to follow migration led to decline in deer’s population.
Although here the author has tried to create a cogent case for the decline of arctic deer’s population. But the argument is ridden with unwarranted assumptions and invalid evidences. To further strengthen the conclusion author must include a deer’s population report from a reliable source, conclusively mention that global warming trends are valid for the arctic region too and proof that sole reason for the decline in deer’s population is their inability to follow migration pattern.
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: 18 15
No. of Words: 381 350
No. of Characters: 1958 1500
No. of Different Words: 174 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.418 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.139 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.552 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 163 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 104 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 64 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 46 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.167 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.867 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.357 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.573 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.088 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 312, Rule ID: ON_FIRST_GLANCE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'at'?
Suggestion: At
...nters and recent global warming trends. On a cursory glance, these evidences might...
^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... decline in deer's population. Although here the author has tried to cr...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, hence, if, so, then, therefore, thus, while, for example, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 27.0 28.8173652695 94% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 55.5748502994 70% => OK
Nominalization: 26.0 16.3942115768 159% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2068.0 2260.96107784 91% => OK
No of words: 381.0 441.139720559 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.42782152231 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41805628031 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84003812934 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.459317585302 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 628.2 705.55239521 89% => 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
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.5983398408 57.8364921388 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.888888889 119.503703932 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.1666666667 23.324526521 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.5 5.70786347227 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.184850029788 0.218282227539 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0718262337957 0.0743258471296 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0448141367582 0.0701772020484 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.124364499168 0.128457276422 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0236898187126 0.0628817314937 38% => 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: 14.7 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.21 12.5979740519 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.24 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 98.500998004 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.