In the argument presented here the author provides two examples which are being used by the opposing groups of Maple County about the effects of the proposed measures. Scrutinizing it further we see that the prediction is biased and improperly formed.
The council is concerned that limiting the growth of residential areas will result in a significant rise in housing prices. But the major factor behind price rise is demand. When the council takes the example of Pine County, they forget to inquire if the county is located near an industrial area and if there was scope for further expansion or not. If so, it can be expected that the area will see a rising demand. The council must study the effects of geographic locations on the real estate prices to predict better.
Demand can be satisfied by adding new housing projects and if there is scope to add them around Maple county, there is a chance that the price may not increase at a rate beyond the average rate of inflation. Chestnut county which was being used by the opposing group may have faced a modest price rise due to any of the above mentioned reasons.In 2008 crash there was a drop in real estate prices and some of the property were sold at less than half their price of purchase. If there was such an economic crisis in the country over the last 10 years, it could be possible that the area around Pine county had better scope in developing economically over Chestnut, people would prefer to spend their money in places which can be profitable. The council must further study the economic growth around their area to predict better.
Assuming that the economic situation is similar everywhere, 15 years is a long period and an annual growth of 5 to 6 percent is sufficient to double the price and without comparing the actual price rise that Chestnut and Pine saw, it is hard to say that both the examples are opposing and may prove the predictions of the council incorrect.
In conclusion the council has ommitted or neglected various economic and geographic factors in their study and the facts presented cannot support the predcition.
Essay evaluation report
Sentence: In conclusion the council has ommitted or neglected various economic and geographic factors in their study and the facts presented cannot support the predcition.
Error: ommitted Suggestion: committed
Error: predcition Suggestion: prediction
--------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 5.0 out of 6
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 2 2
No. of Sentences: 13 15
No. of Words: 368 350
No. of Characters: 1715 1500
No. of Different Words: 184 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.38 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.66 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.39 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 125 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 80 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 53 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 28 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 28.308 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 15.828 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.615 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.355 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.606 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.079 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 345, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: In
...e to any of the above mentioned reasons.In 2008 crash there was a drop in real est...
^^
Line 5, column 402, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...re was a drop in real estate prices and some of the property were sold at less than half th...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, may, so, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 28.8173652695 66% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 55.5748502994 85% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 16.3942115768 30% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1752.0 2260.96107784 77% => OK
No of words: 367.0 441.139720559 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.77384196185 5.12650576532 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37689890912 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.45742731046 2.78398813304 88% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 204.123752495 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.506811989101 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 546.3 705.55239521 77% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
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: 28.0 22.8473053892 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 85.1018881162 57.8364921388 147% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.769230769 119.503703932 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.2307692308 23.324526521 121% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.38461538462 5.70786347227 42% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.143199101229 0.218282227539 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0535781603688 0.0743258471296 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0449750985013 0.0701772020484 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.076444543563 0.128457276422 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0375362045887 0.0628817314937 60% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 14.3799401198 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.52 48.3550499002 107% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.68 12.5979740519 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.6 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 98.500998004 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 11.1389221557 119% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.