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.
In the editorial from the local newspaper, it is stated that although Prunty County lowered its speed limit in efforts of improving its highway safety, its initiative has not turned out as they were hoping it to. In light of these events, Purity County has now decided to follow the footsteps of Butler County, who have successfully implemented their highway safety campaign five years ago -- by increasing lane width, resurfacing rough highways and improving visibility at the dangerous intersection. It can be inferred that the author believes that implementing these measures taken by Butler County, five years ago, will cast the same success on Prunty county. However, before this recommendation can be properly evaluated, three specific pieces of evidence must be collected and analyzed
First of all, Expecting a similar result in Purity Count for the measure taken 5 years by Butler County -- is a little too much to expect. A lot has changed over the last five years which could be a dealbreaker for this assumption. For instance, the economy, during the last five year the economy has exacted a toll. The raw materials required to make the highway extension would cost nearly double because of the increase in the tax for building materials. Considering these above points, if true, it could significantly weaken the authors’ assumption.
Secondly, even if the above implications of the assumption does not make a difference, A city is very different from B city. For starters, the population of A is nearly double than the population of B which in return implies, the number of commuters in city A will be more than that of city B. Also to be very specific, in light of the recent research, 80% of the working professionals of city A are making use of the highway to reach their workplace faster which explains the pattern of high speeding to reach the workplace soon. With the above implications, it can be said that the author’s conclusion does not hold water.
And finally, Despite all the points mentioned above, the argument still leaves many unanswered questions. For instance, how reliable is the survey taken in city B? How is the author very sure that the reduction in accidents in city B is sole because of this measure. The author fails to give more specific numbers about the accident trend in B for us to come to a conclusion.
In conclusion, the argument, as it stands now, considerably flawed due to its several unwarranted assumptions. If the author is able to provide the two pieces of evidence stated above and perhaps conduct a systematic research study, then it will be possible to determine if these measures will improve the highway safety conditions of the city A.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 455 350
No. of Characters: 2186 1500
No. of Different Words: 230 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.619 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.804 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.695 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 162 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 113 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 82 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 51 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.765 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 15 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.588 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.299 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.554 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.08 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 792, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... evidence must be collected and analyzed First of all, Expecting a similar result...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 395, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...0% of the working professionals of city A are making use of the highway to reach thei...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, still, then, for instance, in conclusion, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 65.0 55.5748502994 117% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2265.0 2260.96107784 100% => OK
No of words: 455.0 441.139720559 103% => OK
Chars per words: 4.97802197802 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.61852021839 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82565623856 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 244.0 204.123752495 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.536263736264 0.468620217663 114% => OK
syllable_count: 713.7 705.55239521 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.22255489022 213% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 67.6553539166 57.8364921388 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.833333333 119.503703932 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.2777777778 23.324526521 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.44444444444 5.70786347227 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.197732873629 0.218282227539 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0560735628534 0.0743258471296 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0676929504545 0.0701772020484 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0993394534013 0.128457276422 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0682908984365 0.0628817314937 109% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.9 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.9 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 116.0 98.500998004 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.5 12.3882235529 157% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.