During the past year, Alta Manufacturing had thirty percent more on-the-job accidents than nearby Panoply Industries, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. Experts believe that a significant contributing factor in many on-the-job accidents is fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers. Therefore, to reduce the number of on-the-job accidents at Alta and thereby increase productivity, we should shorten each of our three work shifts by one hour so that our employees will get adequate amounts of sleep.
According to the memo, the vice president claims that Alta manufacturing has a higher rate of accidents because of sleep deprivation among the workers. To build a strong ground in his opinion the president cites some evidence such as (1)Panoply Industries has a lower rate of accidents because they have shorter working hours (2)according to some experts sleep deprivation and fatigue is a reason. As the memo's decision is baseless and without any proper survey results it fails to convince me.
There may be lots of reasons for accidents in factories like -- using arcane methods which have higher risks, lacking safety-related tools, proper training etc. but without concerning any of these factors memo directly concludes that accidents are likely to occur because of sleep deprivation.
Moreover, the memo supports his claim based on only one company named
'Panoply Industries', where there can be other industries those have higher working hours but lower accidents rate. The vice president's hypothesis cannot be assumed true based on a single example. He should have surveyed at least 30 to 40 industries before announcing such guileful statements.
Thirdly, no interview was taken from the works, while they are the ones who could clearly identify their problems and what actually needed to lessen the accidental rate. Workers may be facing serious lacking of safety kits or proper training and working an extra hour might not be the cause.
To put in a nutshell, vice president failed to convince me with statements full of assumptions, own hypothesis, based on refutable surveys. Most importantly he did not consider any of his workers claims about the frequent accidents.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- duplicated to argument 1
----------------
flaws:
No. of Words: 269 350
----------------------
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: 11 15
No. of Words: 269 350
No. of Characters: 1381 1500
No. of Different Words: 170 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.05 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.134 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.643 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 106 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 82 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 53 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 34 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.455 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.699 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.545 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.374 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.682 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.096 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 198, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'factors'' or 'factor's'?
Suggestion: factors'; factor's
...tc. but without concerning any of these factors memo directly concludes that accidents ...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 293, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...re announcing such guileful statements. Thirdly, no interview was taken from the...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, if, may, moreover, so, third, thirdly, while, at least, in fact, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 19.6327345309 51% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 13.6137724551 37% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 28.8173652695 52% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 55.5748502994 61% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 16.3942115768 24% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1422.0 2260.96107784 63% => OK
No of words: 269.0 441.139720559 61% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.28624535316 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0498419064 4.56307096286 89% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70252637989 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 204.123752495 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.64312267658 0.468620217663 137% => OK
syllable_count: 440.1 705.55239521 62% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 19.7664670659 61% => 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: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.4136959607 57.8364921388 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.5 119.503703932 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4166666667 23.324526521 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.25 5.70786347227 127% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.124638842553 0.218282227539 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0429625604793 0.0743258471296 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0492004918116 0.0701772020484 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0574423877712 0.128457276422 45% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.038706230814 0.0628817314937 62% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.7 12.5979740519 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.48 8.32208582834 114% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 98.500998004 82% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.