The following appeared in a recommendation
from the President of the Amburg Chamber of
Commerce.
"Last October, the city of Belleville installed highintensity lighting in its central business district, and
vandalism there declined almost immediately. The
city of Amburg, on the other hand, recently institutedpolice patrols on bicycles in its business district.
However, the rate of vandalism here remains
constant. Since high-intensity lighting is clearly the
most effective way to combat crime, we recommend
using the money that is currently being spent on
bicycle patrols to install such lighting throughout
Amburg. If we install this high-intensity lighting, we
will significantly reduce crime rates in Amburg."
Write a response in which you discuss what
questions would need to be answered in order to
decide whether the recommendation is likely to have
the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the
answers to these questions would help to evaluate
the recommendation.
The author recommends that they should use the money that is currently being spent on bicycle patrols to install lighting throughout Amburg. The recommendation is mainly based on that the city of Belleville installed high-intensity lighting in its central business district and then vandalism there declined almost immediately, while the city of Amburg recently instituted police patrols on bicycles in its business district and the rate of vandalism here remains unchanged. Nevertheless, some questions should be addressed before the author proves the validity of this argument.
The author mentions that the city of Belleville installed high-intensity lighting in its central business district last October and then vandalism there declined almost immediately and infers that it is the installment that resulted in the decrease of vandalism. However, the sequence of the two events, in itself, does not sufficiently prove that the former one caused the latter one without some question being addressed. In all likelihood, the main factor of the declination of vandalism is that the city of Belleville promoted a sweeping moral education at the same time, so people may not make this immoral mistake due to the shame. It is also probable that the government of Belleville imposed heavier fine on those who are discovered to commit vandalism, so that people might not destroy the public facilities deliberately because they are fear of the punishment. Under these scenarios, the author fails to substantiate the argument.
The speaker also mentions that the city of Amburg recently instituted police patrols on bicycles in its business district and the rate of vandalism here remains unchanged. Basing on this fact, the author unfairly infers that these two things have a causality. Nevertheless, the causal relationship between the two events cannot hold water without the following questions being answered. Are there enough police patrols on bicycles instituted to ensure that all the vandalism will be discovered? Not exactly. It is entirely possible that there are only two police patrols in the whole business district. So the constant rate of vandalism can be attributed to the inadequacy of the polices rather than the uselessness of them. It is also probable that the former rate of vandalism is trivial, which means that it is still little even if unchanged, and the police patrols have already diminished this behavior in the maximum. Hence, answering the aforementioned questions might more defensibly reinforce the argument.
On the basis that the two causalities are justifiable, the author finally suggests that they should also install such lighting throughout Amburg. Nonetheless, the author fails to illustrate that the city of Belleville and Amburg are similar enough at every aspect and are indeed comparable. Many differences may exist in Belleville and Amburg and these differences might render the project proved to be effective in Belleville might not have the same effectiveness in Amburg. First, the business district in Belleville might be dark before so that the installment of lighting is effective, while in Amburg, the business district might be bright enough, which means that installing such lighting is of no sense. Even if the similar lighting may be conducive to the decrease of vandalism, it may not be useful to diminish the rates of all kinds of crime, such as stealing and robbing. To reduce these kids of crimes, police patrols might be proper because they are deterrent to the criminals. Without addressing these questions, the author cannot convincingly persuade us the feasibility and effectiveness of this recommendation.
To sum up, although the conclusion may be comprehensible in some aspects, some questions should be addressed before the author substantiates the argument. Had the author delivered more answers to the questions, the conclusion and the whole argument might be defensible.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
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: 26 15
No. of Words: 616 350
No. of Characters: 3265 1500
No. of Different Words: 244 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.982 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.3 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.86 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 262 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 193 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 153 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 97 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.692 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.604 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.654 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.304 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.469 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.073 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, hence, however, if, may, nevertheless, nonetheless, so, still, then, while, in fact, such as, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 34.0 19.6327345309 173% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 12.9520958084 162% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 24.0 13.6137724551 176% => OK
Pronoun: 49.0 28.8173652695 170% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 76.0 55.5748502994 137% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3342.0 2260.96107784 148% => OK
No of words: 616.0 441.139720559 140% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.42532467532 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.98190197535 4.56307096286 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94815742989 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 249.0 204.123752495 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.404220779221 0.468620217663 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1050.3 705.55239521 149% => 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: 15.0 8.76447105788 171% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.9887923064 57.8364921388 114% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.68 119.503703932 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.64 23.324526521 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.2 5.70786347227 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 6.88822355289 189% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.265683207961 0.218282227539 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0753040977442 0.0743258471296 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.121409514433 0.0701772020484 173% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.17164631984 0.128457276422 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.125688560877 0.0628817314937 200% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 14.3799401198 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.3550499002 80% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.51 12.5979740519 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.39 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 139.0 98.500998004 141% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 12.3882235529 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
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.