1.1. The following appeared in a memo from the Board of Directors of Butler Manufacturing.
"During the past year, workers at Butler Manufacturing reported 30 percent more on-the-job accidents than workers at nearby Panoply Industries, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. A recent government study reports that fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers are significant contributing factors in many on-the-job accidents. Therefore, we recommend that Butler Manufacturing shorten each of its work shifts by one hour. Shorter shifts will allow Butler to improve its safety record by ensuring that its employees are adequately rested."
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 board of directors of Butler Manufacturing recommends to the shortening the entire working shifts in the factory by an hour, to guarantee workers adequate rest and prevent the possible on-job-incidents. This advice cannot be accepted as it stands since it relies on the series of the evidence all of which are skeptical and questionable. The following paragraphs will list these raised inquiries and required clues for verification of the note.
The first problem with the note is the comparison, which is done between the Butler Manufacturing and Panoply Industries, actually, there is no information about these two companies. Furthermore, an accurate comparison is done among two identical elements in which will be the chance the contrasting and bolding the differences; otherwise, it would be the comparison of apples and oranges. A series of question which comes to mind is; firstly, are the type of job and working load at two companies the same? Secondly, do the safety factor of both factories identical? Thirdly, do the employees possess the same level of knowledge and expertise about their working? If only the first question considered for the further consideration, it is possible that the burden of responsibility at Panoply Industries is lower than the Butler Manufacturing; therefore, working load in Butler Manufacturing is more tedious than the Panoply Industries, and workers in Butler Manufacturing feel more fatigue. Consequently, the method implemented in Panoply Industries cannot be accountable for Butler Manufacturing.
The other issue with the note is the reference which is given to recent study conducted by the government, this is a vague and shaky reference since there is no clue this research is applicable in the field of occupation at Butler Manufacturing. Indeed, the overgeneralization of finding in the specific study, there should be similarities between the studies case studies and target population; otherwise, it will be dead-ended effort. At this stage the question which should be responded by Board of Director is does this study include the type of job that they have in the Butler Manufacturing? For instance, there is a probability that the studies group was the drivers who are more susceptible to the on-job-accidents caused by the lack of sleep and tiredness of the driving. In this scenario, the presented result merely represents this category and overlooked the other possible factors such as the employees’ expertise with working the machines which is one of the most striking factors in the on-the-job calamity in the field of industry. Therefore, this study cannot be a cogent source to rely on.
Finally, the Board Directors assumes that the shorten hour from the shift will be allocated for the resting hours by the workers, which is unreliable and dubious substance and leads to another question. Do the labors spend this one-hour as their resting period? Maybe they prefer to spend it as the spare time with their family or spend it on doing personal chores. In this case, the factory misses one hour working without warrantee that workers will be well-rested. Therefore, there is no guarantee that the recommended plan will be effective in raising the alertness of workers and the reduction of hazardous in the factory.
To wrap it up, all the aforementioned problems and questions, explicitly depict that the note is doubtful and requires further explanation about the similarities of two compared companies to be assured that the same method implement in neighborhood company will be accountable for Butler Manufacturing. In addition, the study done by the government is applicable in Butler Manufacturing and the one-hour shorten by the company will be used for the rest and not other activities.
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: 23 15
No. of Words: 602 350
No. of Characters: 3107 1500
No. of Different Words: 259 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.953 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.161 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.003 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 228 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 182 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 129 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 96 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.174 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.158 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.565 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.285 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.496 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.071 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 43, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...nally, the Board Directors assumes that the shorten hour from the shift will be allocated f...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 480, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... for the rest and not other activities.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, consequently, finally, first, firstly, furthermore, if, look, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, third, thirdly, well, for instance, in addition, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 38.0 19.6327345309 194% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 11.1786427146 188% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 84.0 55.5748502994 151% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3177.0 2260.96107784 141% => OK
No of words: 602.0 441.139720559 136% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.27740863787 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.95335121839 4.56307096286 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.13273754837 2.78398813304 113% => OK
Unique words: 268.0 204.123752495 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.445182724252 0.468620217663 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 999.9 705.55239521 142% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 73.8649203955 57.8364921388 128% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.130434783 119.503703932 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.1739130435 23.324526521 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.4347826087 5.70786347227 130% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.67664670659 214% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.218426429276 0.218282227539 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0661796312381 0.0743258471296 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0804680367795 0.0701772020484 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.126816332785 0.128457276422 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0687532263558 0.0628817314937 109% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 14.3799401198 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.63 48.3550499002 76% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.197005988 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.64 12.5979740519 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.07 8.32208582834 109% => OK
difficult_words: 158.0 98.500998004 160% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => 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.