Argument Topic: The following appears in a letter to the editor for the West Lansburg News:
"The tufted groundhog lives in the coastal wetlands of West Lansburg. Ancient records suggest that the tufted groundhog once numbered in the millions. Since they were declared a wildlife sanctuary in 2004, development along the coastal wetlands has been prohibited. Now local development interests are lobbying for the West Lansburg council to allow an access road to be built along the edge of wetlands. Neighboring Eastern Carpenteria, which had a similar sanctuary, has seen its sea otter population decline since the repeal of its sanctuary status in 1978. In order to preserve the region's biodiversity and ensure a healthy environment, the West Lansburg council should not allow the road to be built."
According the letter, West Lansburg council should prohibit the development of road along the edge of coastal wetlands in order to preserve the region's biodiversity and to make sure that healthy milie is being maintained.Letter posists that a sanctuary at nearby area - Eastern Carpenteria - saw a popluation of one of habitat to decline, once the sanctuary status was retracted. However, before this argument can be properly evaluated,two pieces of evidence must be collected and analyzed.
Firstly, Its not clear what actually was the reason behind dwindling sea otter's population. It is quite plausible that sea otters were gradually declining before the Eastern Carpenteria's sanctuary status was even removed in 1978. Additionally, another likely case can be that sea otters were declining because of paucity in the food sources they prey upon - which had nothing to do with its sanctuary's status. Moreover, another probable cause could be that sea otters had intentionally left that habitat way before the sanctuary's status was repealed. If either of these scenarios has merit, then the conclusion drawn in the original argument is significantly weakened.
Secondly, no evidence is present to assess what does the word "similar sanctuary" actually mean in the letter. If similar sanctuary means that both of the sanctuaries are comparable in every aspect then the argument stated in the letter might have some weight, but since it is not clearly it makes difficult to comprehend argument's position. For instance - Eastern Carpenteria town could be way to near city and removal of sanctuary status could have caused many outsiders to land on the site during weekends, holidays etc., which could have made it difficult for sea otters to inhabit in the sanctuary anymore, and as it is not clear therefore nothing can be sqaid about west lansburg, it is highly likely that the town is rustic and doen't have many visitors through out the year and thus developement wont affect the daily chores of the habitat and it would be able to maintain healthy environment. If above is true, saying that development would have deleterious affects on biodiversity and environment doesn't hold water.
In conclusion, the argument as it stands now is considerably flawed due to its reliance on several unstated assumptions. If further evidence as stated above are provided and perhaps systematic research study is conducted, then it will be possible to determine argument's validity.
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: 14 15
No. of Words: 397 350
No. of Characters: 2037 1500
No. of Different Words: 225 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.464 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.131 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.739 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 160 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 122 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 87 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 52 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 28.357 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 20.43 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.714 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.33 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.55 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.08 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 145, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'regions'' or 'region's'?
Suggestion: regions'; region's
...astal wetlands in order to preserve the regions biodiversity and to make sure that heal...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 222, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Letter
... that healthy milie is being maintained.Letter posists that a sanctuary at nearby area...
^^^^^^
Line 2, column 437, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , two
... this argument can be properly evaluated,two pieces of evidence must be collected an...
^^^^
Line 4, column 74, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'otters'' or 'otter's'?
Suggestion: otters'; otter's
...lly was the reason behind dwindling sea otters population. It is quite plausible that ...
^^^^^^
Line 6, column 771, Rule ID: THROUGH_OUT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'throughout'?
Suggestion: throughout
... is rustic and doent have many visitors through out the year and thus developement wont aff...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 1017, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...affects on biodiversity and environment doesnt hold water. In conclusion, the argum...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, firstly, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, for instance, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.6327345309 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 55.5748502994 90% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2092.0 2260.96107784 93% => OK
No of words: 393.0 441.139720559 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.32315521628 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45244063426 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93129303481 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 224.0 204.123752495 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.569974554707 0.468620217663 122% => OK
syllable_count: 657.9 705.55239521 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 1.0 8.76447105788 11% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 19.7664670659 66% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 30.0 22.8473053892 131% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 128.605860891 57.8364921388 222% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 160.923076923 119.503703932 135% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.2307692308 23.324526521 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.69230769231 5.70786347227 170% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.096679796323 0.218282227539 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0318589698444 0.0743258471296 43% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.031490155698 0.0701772020484 45% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0606515708964 0.128457276422 47% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0323628638828 0.0628817314937 51% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.7 14.3799401198 130% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.57 48.3550499002 67% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.2 12.197005988 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.17 12.5979740519 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.34 8.32208582834 112% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 98.500998004 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 11.1389221557 126% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => 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.