Based on the discovery of a new chemical, Chemical Y, the CEO of Cot-Ten decides that the company should switch from Chemical X to Chemical Y because the former produces a by-product which falls under stringent environmental regulations making it difficult to dispose off. There are some assumptions that have been made without providing any evidence which undermines the plausibility of the conclusion.
Firstly, the CEO of Cot-Ten states that Chemical X produces a by-product which is costly to dispose off, so the company should make a switch to the new chemical, Chemical Y. There isn't any evidence provided which makes sure that Chemical Y will not produce the same by-product during cotton production. The CEO of the company should provide this evidence before making the switch or else the whole purpose of switching to Chemical Y is defeated. It will be futile to switch in case Chemical Y produces the same by-product.
Even if it is proved that the new chemical will not produce the same by-product, it must also be proven that switching to the new chemical will not cause any other serious side effects. These include, but not limited to serious health issues and release of other foul-smelling by-products and fumes. The new chemical maybe noisome and may cause other health problems to the workers. Moreover, it is not evident from the prompt that the quality of cotton produced by the new chemical will be at-par with the quality of the cotton that was produced earlier by using Chemical X. Decline in the quality of the cotton produced may cause a meteoric decrease in the sales and may cause more harm than good. If the CEO can provide evidence that the new chemical will not cause serious maladies and the quality of the cotton will be comparable to the quality of the cotton earlier manufactured, only then should the CEO consider to switch to Chemical Y.
The prompt mentions that a new chemical, Chemical Y has been discovered that can be used but doesn't mention if it necessarry to choose Chemical Y. Is there any other chemical, other than Chemical X and Chemical Y that can be used for cotton production? There must be a lot of other cotton manufacturing companies and it is probable that they may be using some other chemical to produce cotton which may not be producing the same by-product, has similar cost, doesn't have any side-effects, doesn't cause harm to the people working with it and produces comparable quality cotton. If the author cannot provide evidence against this, then the company should not switch to the new chemical.
It is clear that because of the above-mentioned reasons, there are a number of serious assumptions that have been and evidences must be provided in order to bolster the argument. The author needs to provide evidence that Chemical Y will not produce the same by-product, it will not be detrimental to the health of the workers, it will not deteriorate the quality of the cotton produced and cause further plunge in the sales, and that there is no other chemical that can be used. If the author is able to provide evidence against all this, then the CEO should switch to the new chemical, Chemical Y. Without providing evidences against this, the author's argument is bereft of critical foundation.
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: 16 15
No. of Words: 559 350
No. of Characters: 2662 1500
No. of Different Words: 184 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.862 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.762 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.593 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 204 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 154 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 99 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 40 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 34.938 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 15.336 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.625 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.452 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.625 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.15 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 181, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
... to the new chemical, Chemical Y. There isnt any evidence provided which makes sure ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 911, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[3]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'consider switching'.
Suggestion: consider switching
... manufactured, only then should the CEO consider to switch to Chemical Y. The prompt mentions tha...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 94, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...as been discovered that can be used but doesnt mention if it necessarry to choose Chem...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 460, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... the same by-product, has similar cost, doesnt have any side-effects, doesnt cause har...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 490, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...lar cost, doesnt have any side-effects, doesnt cause harm to the people working with i...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 645, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...t providing evidences against this, the authors argument is bereft of critical foundati...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, may, moreover, so, then
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.6327345309 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 29.0 12.9520958084 224% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 23.0 13.6137724551 169% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 28.8173652695 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 71.0 55.5748502994 128% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2706.0 2260.96107784 120% => OK
No of words: 555.0 441.139720559 126% => OK
Chars per words: 4.87567567568 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.85370353223 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65300004147 2.78398813304 95% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 204.123752495 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.340540540541 0.468620217663 73% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 863.1 705.55239521 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 70.1250846702 57.8364921388 121% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.3 119.503703932 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.75 23.324526521 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.7 5.70786347227 47% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.244299702973 0.218282227539 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0988981230489 0.0743258471296 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0803309236804 0.0701772020484 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.176406217961 0.128457276422 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0624239488557 0.0628817314937 99% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 14.3799401198 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 48.3550499002 91% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.32 12.5979740519 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.68 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 98.500998004 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.