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."
Some city commissioners claim that the Grandview Symphony has the ability to be self-supporting because of the rise of private contributions and the attendance at the concerts-in-the-park series. However, several questions in the argument need to be addressed to make the suggestion more convincing.
The author claims that private contributions increased by 200 percent last year. Nevertheless, what is the exact total of contributions, one dollar, a thousand dollars, or a million dollars? It does not mention the base number of private contributions, nor tell us how much percentage the private contributions accounted for in the total revenue. For example, if the private contributions only accounted for 1% of the total revenue, then a 200 percent increase can barely help the symphony to be self-supporting.
Even if the private contributions occupies a huge part of the revenue, the fact that happened last year is not a piece of sound evidence to draw a conclusion in a future situation. For instance, perhaps a rich person, also a fanatic fan of the symphony, donated all his money to the symphony before dying so as to make the private contributions suddenly surge. Or perhaps a company decided to invest the symphony last year but not to do in this year and the future, due to the fact that the profits did not achieve the goal of expectation. Any of these events, if true, would serve to undermine the claims that the symphony can now be fully self-supporting.
The author also mentions the attendance at the concerts-in-the-park series doubled, and considering it will increase the revenue. Nonetheless, a correlation between the rise of audiences in the specific activity and the profits does not necessarily infer a causal relation. It is entirely possible that there are some other factors interfering in the relation between them. For example, if the concerts-in-the-park series is a free activity for the community, much more people attending to it does not increase the profits. Even if the ticket is needed for entering this activity, an increase in the ticket price may decrease the number of audiences so as to decline the profits probably. Therefore, without ruling out all other possibilities, it is unfair to conclude that the rise of audiences at the concerts-in-the-park series is responsible for increasing the revenue.
In conclusion, the author needs to address the questions/assumptions as above mentioned to strengthen the argument.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 401 350
No. of Characters: 2019 1500
No. of Different Words: 187 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.475 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.035 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.122 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 150 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 124 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 82 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 51 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.588 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.598 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.765 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.347 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.602 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.116 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
Some city commissioners claim that the G...
^^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...o make the suggestion more convincing. The author claims that private contribut...
^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...lp the symphony to be self-supporting. Even if the private contributions occupi...
^^^^
Line 3, column 309, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
... his money to the symphony before dying so as to make the private contributions suddenly...
^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...hony can now be fully self-supporting. The author also mentions the attendance ...
^^^^
Line 4, column 654, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...ce may decrease the number of audiences so as to decline the profits probably. Therefore...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...esponsible for increasing the revenue. In conclusion, the author needs to addre...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, may, nevertheless, nonetheless, so, then, therefore, as to, for example, for instance, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.6327345309 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 28.8173652695 62% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 55.5748502994 94% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2077.0 2260.96107784 92% => OK
No of words: 396.0 441.139720559 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.24494949495 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46091344257 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.51071773523 2.78398813304 126% => OK
Unique words: 192.0 204.123752495 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.484848484848 0.468620217663 103% => OK
syllable_count: 653.4 705.55239521 93% => 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: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.030314188 57.8364921388 59% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 122.176470588 119.503703932 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2941176471 23.324526521 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.29411764706 5.70786347227 128% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.25449101796 133% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.279526171156 0.218282227539 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0844981453463 0.0743258471296 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.081206659647 0.0701772020484 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.129876464812 0.128457276422 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0809554323278 0.0628817314937 129% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 14.3799401198 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.41 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.45 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 98.500998004 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => 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.