"The Mozart School of Music should be the first choice for parents considering enrolling their child in music lessons. First of all, the Mozart School welcomes youngsters at all ability and age levels; there is no audition to attend the school. Second, the school offers instruction in nearly all musical instruments as well a wide range of styles and genres from classical to rock. Third, the faculty includes some of the most distinguished musicians in the area. Finally, many Mozart graduates have gone on to become well-known and highly paid professional musicians. "
The argument states that Mozart School of Music should be the first choice for parents considering their children music lesson because it provides them many benefits from their age level to the best teachers because it has some well paid faculty members. Stated in this way the argument fails to represent many facts on which the argument could be evaluated. The conclusion of this argument depends on faulty evidence and it is somewhat capricious choice. Therefore, the argument is incomplete, flawed and fails to delineate a considerable attention.
Firstly, the argument assumes that, the Mozart School welcome youngsters according to their age level and no audition to attend is required. Since, the way of getting chance is fortuitous and also whimsical as there are many factors is quit omitted. For example, the students enter a school but the school authority does not mention any age or requirements level, then the order of school is imperil. The points could have been fortified, if author stated a big picture regarding the students age and school policy and also class order of school.
Secondly, the argument claims that, the school offers wide areas of musical instruments and styles. The claims sounds like fictitious as it has not mentioned any specific instrument and any specific style and their future impacts. For instance, Gemini school provide great teaching in all fields and they have many styles and genres but no one sure about their peculiarity. The claims might have been convincing, if it states specific area and also specific styles.
Moreover, the argument also assumes that, they have provide most distinguished faculty, but did not any lionized figure. Therefore the choice is limited. The choice could be reasonable, if its depicts any influential figures in details and also it would have been convincing enough if they provide any references of them.
Posing several questions from students selection to their teaching methods and also their teachers criteria, the argument keeps any reasonable reader in a state of skeptical.
In conclusion, as the argument is unable to provide crystal answer of the above mentioned question and also keeps it hidebound regarding its strategies. Any argument would be convincing if it provide enough details, it is the primary requirements. On this criteria, the argument is flawed and unconvincing enough to attract a discreet person.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 386 350
No. of Characters: 1979 1500
No. of Different Words: 187 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.432 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.127 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.57 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 165 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 115 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 80 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 42 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.316 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.568 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.789 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.34 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.604 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.101 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 393, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'imperiled', 'imperilled'.
Suggestion: imperiled; imperilled
...ents level, then the order of school is imperil. The points could have been fortified, ...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 112, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[1]
Message: You should probably use 'sound'.
Suggestion: sound
...ical instruments and styles. The claims sounds like fictitious as it has not mentioned...
^^^^^^
Line 13, column 53, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'provided'.
Suggestion: provided
...e argument also assumes that, they have provide most distinguished faculty, but did not...
^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 122, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...culty, but did not any lionized figure. Therefore the choice is limited. The choice could...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 21, column 193, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'provides'?
Suggestion: provides
... Any argument would be convincing if it provide enough details, it is the primary requi...
^^^^^^^
Line 21, column 252, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...ils, it is the primary requirements. On this criteria, the argument is flawed and un...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, moreover, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, well, for example, for instance, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 11.1786427146 179% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 13.6137724551 37% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 55.5748502994 59% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2048.0 2260.96107784 91% => OK
No of words: 386.0 441.139720559 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.30569948187 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.43248042346 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67687168737 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 192.0 204.123752495 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.497409326425 0.468620217663 106% => OK
syllable_count: 629.1 705.55239521 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 16.0 8.76447105788 183% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.7782470932 57.8364921388 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.789473684 119.503703932 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3157894737 23.324526521 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.21052631579 5.70786347227 126% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => 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: 0.24531171112 0.218282227539 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0740031334006 0.0743258471296 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100239537256 0.0701772020484 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.112851523074 0.128457276422 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0981738532511 0.0628817314937 156% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 14.3799401198 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.84 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 98.500998004 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => 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.