During the past year, Quiot Manufacturing had 30 percent more on-the-job accidents than at the nearby Panoply Industries plant, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. Experts say that significant contributing factors in many on-the-job accidents are fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers. Therefore, to reduce the number of on-the-job accidents at Quiot and thereby increase productivity, we should shorten each of our three work shifts by one hour so that employees will get adequate amounts of sleep.
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on the assumptions and what the implications are if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The author states that in order to decrease on-the-job accidents and increasing productivity. Shortening work shifts is the way to achieve. However, several assumptions in the content needs support.
First of all, it is assumed that the experts are highly prominent of their studies. Who are the experts? Are they young college graduates making analysis based on textbooks and their lousy charts? Or are they experienced researchers but making wild guesses? Before believing the experts words, we must first understand who these people are.
Secondly, in order to conduct these work shifts cut, we have to assume that Panoply Company is entirely the same as Quiot Manufacturing, which is impossible. If Quiot Company is a startup company which has less experience in manufacturing, then it might have more accidents due to the workers lack of experience and proper training. Also it might be possible that Panoply is a highly advanced company that uses robots and automation production lines in their factory. Require few works to have direct interaction with dangerous machine. Therefore, Panoply Company will have less accidents and works and take shorter work shifts.
Thirdly, indicating that reduce job accidents can improve productivity is unreasonable. Maybe Quiot Manufacturing has problems like human factor designs which make productivity low. Or their factory configuration is flawed causing plenty bottle necks during necks. Managers who cannot communicate well with workers may also be one of the reasons causing productivity to slow down. None of these productivity problems and simply be solved by cutting work shifts for an hour.
Last but not least, can we make sure that workers will use their extra free time to rest? Workers may use their time to play cards in the office, chatting with coworkers or even leave the factory to have a little trip in town. Who can promise that workers will use extra time to rest? If they don't, then the claim that shorten work shifts will decrease on-the-job accidents is doubtful.
In conclusion, the argument depends on several critical but unproven assumptions that need to be addressed by the author.
Comments
Essay evaluation 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: 23 15
No. of Words: 347 350
No. of Characters: 1770 1500
No. of Different Words: 193 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.316 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.101 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.662 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 131 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 101 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 57 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 41 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 15.087 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.143 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.609 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.264 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.553 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.095 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 334, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...lack of experience and proper training. Also it might be possible that Panoply is a ...
^^^^
Line 9, column 575, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun accidents is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...e. Therefore, Panoply Company will have less accidents and works and take shorter wo...
^^^^
Line 17, column 294, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...rs will use extra time to rest? If they dont, then the claim that shorten work shift...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, third, thirdly, well, 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: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 55.5748502994 68% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 16.3942115768 43% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1836.0 2260.96107784 81% => OK
No of words: 346.0 441.139720559 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.3063583815 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31289638616 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73349294763 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 190.0 204.123752495 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.549132947977 0.468620217663 117% => OK
syllable_count: 558.9 705.55239521 79% => 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
Article: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 22.8473053892 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.7573277691 57.8364921388 60% => OK
Chars per sentence: 79.8260869565 119.503703932 67% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.0434782609 23.324526521 64% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.39130434783 5.70786347227 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => 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: 0.154022404767 0.218282227539 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0460729433242 0.0743258471296 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0434279886453 0.0701772020484 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0698530762126 0.128457276422 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0445945319921 0.0628817314937 71% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 14.3799401198 77% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 48.3550499002 116% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.197005988 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.93 12.5979740519 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.26 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 98.500998004 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 5.0 12.3882235529 40% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 11.1389221557 72% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.9071856287 67% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
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.