"The Fern County Council made the right decision when it unanimously voted to convert the Northside branch of the county library system into a computer-skills training facility for public use. The converted facility will fill what is certain, based on national trends, to be a growing need among county residents for training in computer skills. And since our library system boasts more volumes per resident than any other system in the state, the remaining branches will adequately serve the future needs of Fern County residents. "Discuss what evidence you would need to properly evaluate the argument, and explain how that evidence might strengthen or weaken the argument.
The author concludes that the Fern Country Council decision to convert a part of a library into a computer-skills training facility was correct and will be beneficial for the residents. His conclusion based on the assumption that the new computer-skills training facility will be a growing need for county residents and also that the remaining library system will provide sufficient services since the country library system offers more volumes than any other system in the state. Nevertheless, his arguments are weak and have many flows.
First of all, the validity of the decision is controversial since it was voted unanimously. An important decision related to residents will and comfort should be named. Also, the author should question and mention information about residents will. There is a high probability for people not wishing a computer-training facility and still preferring the previous version of County library. The conclusion that the converted facility will be a need for the residents is arbitrary because the people needs and will are not presented and examined. The traditional version of County library might be more likable to residents. However, the author predicted resident’s reaction most probably based on his personal point of view.
Moreover, the author should examine the value and service capacity of the remaining branches and if they will be sufficient and cover the needs of residents after the conversion. The branches have chosen to be replaced and the remaining ones should be presented in details. However, he again arbitrarily assumed that the remaining branches, without even naming them, will continue to serve the residents needs better than any other library system just based on the fact that the previous version of County library provided more volumes than any other one in states.
Finally, the author should mention if the chosen branches of the library to be converted to computer-skills training facilities were from the least active and least crowded ones. Thus, it was decided a more interesting facility section to be created. In this case, County council decision would be better understood. However, such an indication is absent.
To sum up, the conclusion of the author has many flows and weak validity. Many questions should be answered including the resident's will and needs, as well as the remaining branches ability to serve successfully to residents.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The author concludes that the Fern Count...
^^
Line 8, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...based on his personal point of view. Moreover, the author should examine the ...
^^^^
Line 12, column 175, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'branches'' or 'branch's'?
Suggestion: branches'; branch's
...ill and needs, as well as the remaining branches ability to serve successfully to reside...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, however, if, moreover, nevertheless, so, still, thus, well, as well as, first of all, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 12.9520958084 154% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 28.8173652695 52% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 55.5748502994 67% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 16.3942115768 49% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2055.0 2260.96107784 91% => OK
No of words: 382.0 441.139720559 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.37958115183 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.42095241839 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89583347918 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 204.123752495 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.452879581152 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 636.3 705.55239521 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 71.7810228087 57.8364921388 124% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.157894737 119.503703932 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.1052631579 23.324526521 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.15789473684 5.70786347227 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.289126963972 0.218282227539 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0924360619268 0.0743258471296 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0885265978733 0.0701772020484 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.177920199646 0.128457276422 139% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.10849346234 0.0628817314937 173% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.3550499002 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.92 12.5979740519 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.18 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 98.500998004 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 12.3882235529 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => 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.