The following appeared in an e-mail sent by the marketing director of the Classical
Shakespeare Theatre of Bardville.
"Over the past ten years, there has been a 20 percent decline in the size of the
average audience at Classical Shakespeare Theatre productions. In spite of
increased advertising, we are attracting fewer and fewer people to our shows,
causing our profits to decrease significantly. We must take action to attract new
audience members. The best way to do so is by instituting a 'Shakespeare in the
Park' program this summer. Two years ago the nearby Avon Repertory Company
started a 'Free Plays in the Park' program, and its profits have increased 10 percent
since then. If we start a 'Shakespeare in the Park' program, we can predict that our
profits will increase, too.”
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.
In the above e-mail, the author argues that in order to be lucrative they should institute the 'Shakespeare in the Park program'. The author bolsters his argument based on the report that by implementing the same strategy which is instituting the 'Free play in the Park' program the nearby Avon Repertory Company’s profit has increased. However, before evaluating the author’s argument three questions need to be answered.
Firstly, the author argues that in order to attract new audiences the best way is to institute ‘Shakespeare in the Park’ program without providing any necessitate evidence regarding the efficacy of the strategy. One may raise questions about the authenticity of the plan. In other words, will instituting the program enhance their profit significantly? There is a possibility that most audiences watch classical Shakespeare Theatre via the internet. Then one can not argue that by implementing the program the number of audiences will increase significantly. If this is not the case, maybe poor management is the main cause behind the dwindling number of audiences. If the author is able to provide some admissible evidence behind the cause of decreasing audience number perhaps in a form of a systematic research study then it will be possible to evaluate the author’s argument to a certain extent.
Secondly, the aurora argues that by imitating the similar strategy of nearby Avon Repertory Company their theatre will be lucrative in the future without providing any evidence. One may ask questions about the authenticity of the plan. Are those two theatres similar? In other words, is the strategy of using circumstances from one thing to generalize and predict others legitimate? Maybe Avon Repertory Company plays different types of theatre including modern movies whereas the Shakespeare Theatre of Bardville plays only the plays of Shakespeare, then one can not argue that by implementing a similar strategy the Shakespeare Theatre of Bradville will be lucrative. The author has to provide more legitimate evidence regarding both theatres in order to rectify his argument otherwise, the author’s argument is built unreliably.
Thirdly, the author argues that after instituting the 'Free Plays in the Park' program the profit of Avon Repertory Company increases 10 percent over the past two years without providing any proper evidence regarding the past condition. Is using only a percentage to conclude something genuine? A percentage is a tricky situation. Without an absolute number being given one can not conclude anything based on only percentage. Maybe two years ago the profit was 1000 dollars and the production cost was 5000 dollars but after implementing the program the profit became1100 dollars but the production cost increased by 60 percent which is 5300. If the above scenario is true then the author’s argument is fictitious. If the author is able to provide more evidence about the production cost and the previous years' profit perhaps in a form of a statistical data chart then it will strengthen the author’s argument.
In the conclusion, the author’s argument stands now is seriously flawed due to its reliance on several unwarranted assumptions. If the author is able answers the three questions above and offers more evidence perhaps in the form of a systematic research study then it will be possible to evaluate the viability of the proposed recommendation regarding dilating profit by instituting the ‘Shakespeare in the Park program’.
Comments
e-rater score 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: 25 15
No. of Words: 553 350
No. of Characters: 2889 1500
No. of Different Words: 217 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.849 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.224 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.828 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 225 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 183 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 137 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 87 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.12 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.199 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.68 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.313 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.471 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.077 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 294, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'institute'
Suggestion: institute
...icity of the plan. In other words, will instituting the program enhance their profit signif...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 667, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...hind the dwindling number of audiences. If the author is able to provide some admi...
^^
Line 8, column 642, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... increased by 60 percent which is 5300. If the above scenario is true then the aut...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, whereas, as to, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 28.8173652695 66% => OK
Preposition: 79.0 55.5748502994 142% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 16.3942115768 152% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2969.0 2260.96107784 131% => OK
No of words: 553.0 441.139720559 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.36889692586 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.84932490483 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96862417867 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 222.0 204.123752495 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.401446654611 0.468620217663 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 936.0 705.55239521 133% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 4.96107784431 0% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 76.4338563727 57.8364921388 132% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.76 119.503703932 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.12 23.324526521 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.96 5.70786347227 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.124488385732 0.218282227539 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0393797231067 0.0743258471296 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.060281236674 0.0701772020484 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0715910756259 0.128457276422 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.039299517471 0.0628817314937 62% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 14.3799401198 104% => 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: 13.87 12.5979740519 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.01 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 115.0 98.500998004 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => 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.