In an attempt to improve highway safety, Prunty County last year lowered its speed limit from 55 to 45 miles per hour on all county highways . But this effort has failed: the number of accidents has not decreased, and, based on reports by the highway patrol, many drivers are exceeding the speed limit. Prunty County should instead undertake the same kind of road improvement project that Butler County completed five years ago: increasing lane widths, resurfacing rough highways, and improving visibility at dangerous intersections. Today, major Butler County roads still have a 55 mph speed limit, yet there were 25 percent fewer reported accidents in Butler County this past year than there were five years ago.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
In the attempt to improve highway safety in Prunty County, the author argues that adopting the same measures that Butler County used five years ago would reduce reported accidents instead of reducing the speed limit. While the argument may have some merit, the argument is not cogent enough due to insufficient evidence. The evidence provided by the author needs to be evaluated in order to determine the validity of the argument. If the evidence does not hold weight, then the entire argument is unsubstantiated and in need for improvement.
The first evidence in need for evaluation is the number of incidents after reducing the speed limit from 55 miles to 45 miles. The author assumes that reducing the speed limit would not work since the number of incidents did not decrease and the reports that many drivers surpass the speed limit. However, the author does not provide relevant evidence. Accidents may have not reduced because the decrease in speed limit was not enough. The author must continue to lower the speed limit to see if it makes a difference in the number of accidents. If the author does not provide sufficient evidence for support, then the argument is faulty.
Another piece of evidence is the reports on speed limits. The author assumes that reducing the speed limit does not prevent drivers from speeding. However, the author does not provide substantial evidence. Drivers may have surpassed the speed limit due to a lack of enforcement in penalization. Perhaps, drivers exceed the speed limit because they will not be punished. In other words, drivers may have a higher likelihood of following the speed limit if other measures of enforcement are taken. Furthermore, the author fails to provide substantiating evidence that the reduction of speed limit fails. The author must ensure whether surpassing the speed limit reports is a result of a lack of enforcement. If the author does not provide relevant evidence that reduction in speed limit is a poor option, then the argument fails.
The last piece of evidence would be the measures taken by Butler County five years ago. The author assumes that because Butler County took different measures to ensure highway safety instead of reducing speed, it will work the same for Prunty County. However, the evidence is not enough to prove that what works for Butler County will work for Prunty County. The author does not provide statistical data differentiating the number of incidents in Butler County five years ago compared to the past year. Five years ago, Butler County may have had a larger population of drivers compared to the past year. There is a possibility that the number of drivers on the highway decreased, which led to a decrease in incidents. Therefore, it is not the case that the measures taken resulted in reduced accidents. Furthermore, the author must determine the demographics of the region in order to ensure whether the measures taken influenced minimal accidents or was it because over time people stopped driving on the highway.
In conclusion, the author must provide relevant evidence in order to support that reducing the speed limit is futile. If not, then the argument fails.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-01-13 | ssoham10 | 59 | view |
| 2022-08-10 | Funmibeccy | 68 | view |
| 2022-06-30 | Meet0963 | 58 | view |
| 2022-06-23 | Soumyadip Kar | 63 | view |
| 2021-10-31 | thER0CK | 50 | view |
- A recent study reported that pet owners have longer healthier lives on average than do people who own no pets Specifically dog owners tend to have a lower incidence of heart disease In light of these findings Sherwood Hospital should form a partnership wi 50
- The following appeared in a memorandum from the owner of Movies Galore a chain of movie rental stores Because of declining profits we must reduce operating expenses at Movies Galore s ten movie rental stores Raising prices is not a good option since we ar 60
- The following appeared as a recommendation by a committee planning a ten year budget for the city of Calatrava The birthrate in our city is declining in fact last year s birthrate was only one half that of five years ago Thus the number of students enroll 74
- College students should be encouraged to pursue subjects that interest them rather than the courses that seem most likely to lead to jobs Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain y 66
- The human mind will always be superior to machines because machines are only tools of human minds Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take In de 66
Comments
e-rater score 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: 29 15
No. of Words: 527 350
No. of Characters: 2601 1500
No. of Different Words: 170 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.791 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.935 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.502 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 199 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 138 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 90 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 42 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.172 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.711 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.621 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.37 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.37 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.144 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, however, if, may, so, then, therefore, while, in conclusion, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 11.1786427146 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 28.8173652695 59% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 55.5748502994 112% => OK
Nominalization: 30.0 16.3942115768 183% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2658.0 2260.96107784 118% => OK
No of words: 527.0 441.139720559 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04364326376 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.79129216042 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58542085178 2.78398813304 93% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 204.123752495 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.345351043643 0.468620217663 74% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 846.0 705.55239521 120% => 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: 17.0 8.76447105788 194% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 29.0 19.7664670659 147% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.9950549496 57.8364921388 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.6551724138 119.503703932 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.1724137931 23.324526521 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.44827586207 5.70786347227 60% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 14.0 6.88822355289 203% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.233104079608 0.218282227539 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0728659799194 0.0743258471296 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.064764934153 0.0701772020484 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.136975849981 0.128457276422 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0573014417044 0.0628817314937 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 14.3799401198 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.66 12.5979740519 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.47 8.32208582834 90% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 98.500998004 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.