According to a new report from the federal government, overall donations of money to nonprofit groups increased last year. Most notably, donations to international aid groupsincreased by 30 percent, followed by donations to environmental groups, which increased by 23 percent. In contrast, donations to educational institutions did not fare so well, actually decreasing by 3 percent. All the major economic indicators suggest that consumer spending is higher than average this year. In particular, spending has risen considerably for luxury items, such as high-end automobiles, electronics, and fashion, showing that potential donors have ample disposable income. Therefore, the clearest explanation for the decline in donations to educational institutions is that people actually value education less than they did in the past.
Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.
The passage states that, since major economic indicators suggest that the consumer spending is increasing, combined with a supposed decrease in governmental donations to educational institutions, people value education less than ther did in the past. While it is reasonable to agree with this conclusion, more information is needed in order to verify the validity of that affirmation. The author fails o provide concrete evidence to support his/her point of view.
First of all, it is necessary to analyze the author's claim that the government donations for educational institutions decreased 3 percent, while to other groups, such as international aid and environmental groups, increased as much as 30 percent. But the passage fails to mention whether the information in this report is trusthworthy or not. In many situations, it was possible to actually manipulate the numbers to show false situations, even in official reports. There are many reasons that could happen in the government: in ellection's year, for instance, a department could be willing to provide false information in order to benefit one of the candidates. The author would benefit from bringing more information regarding this issue, providing the source of the data he mentions and, if possible, find other sources that confirm the presented claim.
The same thing happens with the affirmation that the economic indicators suggest that consumet spending has increased, in particular for luxury items. Again, there is no source mentioned to convince the readers of the validity of that claim.
Following the aforementioned affirmation, comes the auhtor fragile assumption that, since the spending has considerably risen, specially for luxury items, then the government donations had no reason to decrease. This hypothesis lies on different assumptions regarding the government's budget, the political line chosen by the economic team, and among others. If the government's income is smaller than the public spendings, even with the mentioned increase in the consumer spendings, this argument would loose any strenght. In order to make a convincing point, the author should mention whether the taxes income did, in fact, increase. And, if that were the case, if the the people wanted their politicians to donate public money to educational institutions, rather than finding other solutions to the money raising problem to that end.
In other words, while the author does highlight a possibility, more information ir required in order to provide concrete evidence that support's the presented point of view. The author fails to provide necessary data in order to persuade more critic readers.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Sentence: The passage states that, since major economic indicators suggest that the consumer spending is increasing, combined with a supposed decrease in governmental donations to educational institutions, people value education less than ther did in the past.
Error: ther Suggestion: No alternate word
Sentence: But the passage fails to mention whether the information in this report is trusthworthy or not.
Error: trusthworthy Suggestion: trustworthy
Sentence: The same thing happens with the affirmation that the economic indicators suggest that consumet spending has increased, in particular for luxury items.
Error: consumet Suggestion: consume
Sentence: Following the aforementioned affirmation, comes the auhtor fragile assumption that, since the spending has considerably risen, specially for luxury items, then the government donations had no reason to decrease.
Error: auhtor Suggestion: author
Sentence: If the government's income is smaller than the public spendings, even with the mentioned increase in the consumer spendings, this argument would loose any strenght.
Error: strenght Suggestion: strength
Sentence: In other words, while the author does highlight a possibility, more information ir required in order to provide concrete evidence that support's the presented point of view.
Error: ir Suggestion: No alternate word
--------------------
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- not OK
argument 3 -- not OK
--------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 6 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 413 350
No. of Characters: 2196 1500
No. of Different Words: 209 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.508 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.317 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.887 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 166 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 134 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 102 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 68 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.294 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.474 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.765 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.323 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.554 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.073 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 366, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'governments'' or 'government's'?
Suggestion: governments'; government's
...economic team, and among others. If the governments income is smaller than the public spend...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 503, Rule ID: LOOSE_LOSE[4]
Message: Did you mean 'lose' (= miss, waste, suffer the loss etc.)?
Suggestion: lose
...consumer spendings, this argument would loose any strenght. In order to make a convin...
^^^^^
Line 6, column 598, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'taxes'' or 'tax's', 'taxis's'?
Suggestion: taxes'; tax's; taxis's
..., the author should mention whether the taxes income did, in fact, increase. And, if ...
^^^^^
Line 6, column 666, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...ncrease. And, if that were the case, if the the people wanted their politicians to dona...
^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 666, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...ncrease. And, if that were the case, if the the people wanted their politicians to dona...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, if, regarding, so, then, while, for instance, in fact, in particular, such as, first of all, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.6327345309 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.9520958084 39% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2255.0 2260.96107784 100% => OK
No of words: 412.0 441.139720559 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.47330097087 5.12650576532 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50530610838 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93940256273 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 217.0 204.123752495 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.526699029126 0.468620217663 112% => OK
syllable_count: 702.0 705.55239521 99% => 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: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 2.70958083832 332% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.2985324752 57.8364921388 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.647058824 119.503703932 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.2352941176 23.324526521 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.58823529412 5.70786347227 133% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.127185313693 0.218282227539 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0360922969375 0.0743258471296 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0628433501951 0.0701772020484 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0590927850014 0.128457276422 46% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0579539750075 0.0628817314937 92% => 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: 14.74 12.5979740519 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.2 8.32208582834 111% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 98.500998004 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.5 12.3882235529 133% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 11.9071856287 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.