The following appeared in an article in the Grandview Beacon.
"For many years the city of Grandview has provided annual funding for the Grandview Symphony. Last year, however, private contributions to the symphony increased by 200 percent and attendance at the symphony's concerts-in-the-park series doubled. The symphony has also announced an increase in ticket prices for next year. Given such developments, some city commissioners argue that the symphony can now be fully self-supporting, and they recommend that funding for the symphony be eliminated from next year's budget."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The city commissioners suggests that the symphony can now be fully self-supporting, and they recommend that funding for the symphony be eliminated from next year’s budget. However, several questions need answering to evaluate the claim.
The author states that private contributions to the symphony increased by 200 percent in last year. However, will these private contributions be provided in the future? These private contributions may not be provided in each year. These private donations may be offered by some private enterprises. if they encountered a serious economic recession in the future, they will not be able to provide the contributions for the symphony again. Furthermore, the company may provide the annual funding for other symphony instead of Grandview Symphony because other symphony can attract more audiences. As a result, we need to know whether the private contributions will be offered stably in the future.
The author claims that the private contributions to the symphony increased by 200 percent. Yet, what is the exact number of the private contributions? It is likely that the private contributions still account for a small part of the funds of Grandview Symphony. Grandview Symphony may still use the funding from the local government to pay for each fee. Moreover, Grandview Symphony may not be able to receive the same number of private contributions as last year. It may not able get the same number of private contributions in the next year because the private organization can not offer such huge number of funds again. Thus, the author must provide more reliable data about the private contributions.
The author mentions that the number of the attendance at the symphony’s concerts-in-the-park series doubled in last year. However, if the number of the attendance will grow at the same rate in the future? The number of the audiences may not double in the next year because the audiences will tire of the same content performed by Grandview Symphony. We can predict that the number of the audiences will decline in the future. Therefore, the author must explain if the number of the attendance will still double in the next year.
The author points out that the symphony has also announced an increase in ticket prices for next year. However, will the audiences not come to the concerts again because the ticket prices have risen? The audiences may go to the concerts because of the cheap ticket prices. If the ticket prices are not cheap again, the audiences may not choose to watch the performance of this symphony again. As a result, if the income of the symphony declines in the future because of the less audiences, Grandview Symphony may still need the subsidies from the local government.
The private contributions may help the symphony to grow, but the author needs to answer the above questions to strengthen his or her argument.
Comments
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: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 26 15
No. of Words: 474 350
No. of Characters: 2357 1500
No. of Different Words: 166 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.666 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.973 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.759 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 177 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 131 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 84 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 54 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.231 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.21 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.769 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.391 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.606 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.232 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 24, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[2]
Message: You should probably use 'suggest'.
Suggestion: suggest
The city commissioners suggests that the symphony can now be fully self...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 300, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: If
...be offered by some private enterprises. if they encountered a serious economic rec...
^^
Line 9, column 475, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun audiences is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...y declines in the future because of the less audiences, Grandview Symphony may still...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, so, still, then, therefore, thus, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.6327345309 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 28.0 12.9520958084 216% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 3.0 11.1786427146 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 28.8173652695 73% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 55.5748502994 101% => 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: 2427.0 2260.96107784 107% => OK
No of words: 473.0 441.139720559 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1310782241 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.66353547975 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89075852579 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 204.123752495 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.367864693446 0.468620217663 78% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 743.4 705.55239521 105% => 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: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 19.7664670659 137% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.8539994456 57.8364921388 59% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 89.8888888889 119.503703932 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.5185185185 23.324526521 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.59259259259 5.70786347227 63% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.20758483034 158% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.67664670659 235% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.396208235025 0.218282227539 182% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.1311443466 0.0743258471296 176% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0995370944081 0.0701772020484 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.212383728674 0.128457276422 165% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.104596505797 0.0628817314937 166% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 14.3799401198 80% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.3550499002 112% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.98 8.32208582834 84% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 98.500998004 76% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 12.3882235529 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.