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.
To improve the highway safety in the Prunty County, the authorities are aiming to implement certain measures. A proper evaluation is required before finalising on the measure to be implemented.
The Prunty County has implemented a certain obvious measure like reducing the speed limit in order to decrease the number of accidents causing on the roads. But they have critically missed out the survey required to find the root cause of these accidents. They have assumed that the accidents are occurring due to high speeds. Whereas it may not be the case at all. Also, the speed of 45 miles per hour is too not justified. The decision of finalising the speed limit depends on various factors like the terrain, the population density of the region and many other relevant factors.
As they have failed to achieve the desired results, the County is preferring to adapt a certain measure which is already successful in other location. While thinking about this, they have failed to understand that the safety measures which are successful in other region may not necessarily bear the same fruits in their region. The measures like increasing the lane width, resurfacing the highways and improving visibility at intersections must be requirements of the Butler County as compared to Prunty County. The problems can be resolved by finding solutions to your own problems rather than imitating other’s solutions. The Prunty County may already be having required lane widths and also there may be no accident prone intersections at all in the county. Thus, it doesn’t make any sense in following other’s suit in resolving your own issues.
Along with it, the comparison is made of the current results with those 5 years ago. A lot of thigs can change in these five years. Not necessarily the implementations made have had a positive impact on the outcome. The vehicular usage may have gone done due to awareness of climatic conditions and therefore, the usage of public transportation may have gone up, leading to lesser number of vehicles on the road. Even media could have played an active role in the process, which the author has failed to mention during the course of the argument.
Thus, imitating the Butler County’s measured without evaluating your own problems is not a solution to the issue. A root cause analysis is required to reach an understandable conclusion.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 328, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Whereas” 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.
...dents are occurring due to high speeds. Whereas it may not be the case at all. Also, th...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 64, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...achieve the desired results, the County is preferring to adapt a certain measure which is alr...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 631, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... than imitating other's solutions. The Prunty County may already be having req...
^^^
Line 7, column 513, Rule ID: DURING_THE_COURSE_OF[1]
Message: Use simply 'during'.
Suggestion: during
... which the author has failed to mention during the course of the argument. Thus, imitating the Bu...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, may, so, therefore, thus, whereas, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 13.6137724551 37% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 28.8173652695 59% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 16.3942115768 49% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2006.0 2260.96107784 89% => OK
No of words: 393.0 441.139720559 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.10432569975 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45244063426 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82557114136 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 210.0 204.123752495 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.534351145038 0.468620217663 114% => OK
syllable_count: 639.0 705.55239521 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 15.0 8.76447105788 171% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 44.6152613121 57.8364921388 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.5238095238 119.503703932 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.7142857143 23.324526521 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.61904761905 5.70786347227 46% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.162583017751 0.218282227539 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0492584310483 0.0743258471296 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0556089767442 0.0701772020484 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.089887279974 0.128457276422 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0469268601166 0.0628817314937 75% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 14.3799401198 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.3 12.5979740519 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.75 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 98.500998004 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 12.3882235529 57% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.