The following appeared in an editorial in a local newspaper.
"Commuters complain that increased rush-hour traffic on Blue Highway between the suburbs and the city center has doubled their commuting time. The favored proposal of the motorists' lobby is to widen the highway, adding an additional lane of traffic. Opponents note that last year's addition of a lane to the nearby Green Highway was
followed by a worsening of traffic jams on it. Their suggested alternative proposal is adding a bicycle lane to Blue Highway. Many area residents are keen bicyclists. A bicycle lane would encourage them to use bicycles to commute, it is argued, thereby reducing rush-hour traffic.
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.
In the editorial from the local newspaper, it is stated that opponents of the motorists' lobby's plan to add another lane to Blue Highway have instead advocated that a bicycle lane be constructed in order to alleviate the highway's traffic issues. The opponents have come to this conclusion based on the issues faced by Green Highway last year as well as the keen interest in bicycling of the area's local residents. However, before this recommendation can be property evaluated, three questions must be answered.
First of all, are Green Highway and Blue Highway roughly comparable? In other words, can circumstances from one highway be used to make generalizations and predictions about the other? It is possible that Green Highway and Blue Highway are not similar at all - perhaps Green Highway runs through residential neighborhoods, whereas Blue Highway is located mostly in rural, unpopulated sections of the city. Further, there is a possibility that the quality of the highways is markedly different, with Green Highway roads falling apart and Blue Highway in pristine condition. If either of these scenarios has merit, then the conclusion drawn in the original argument is significantly weakened.
Secondly, do a majority of the area residents interested in biking live within biking distance of their places of employment? The opponents in the argument prematurely assume that many of the residents in the town will bike to work in the morning rather than drive their cars. However, this might not be the case. Perhaps the average distance from home to work is over 15 miles, and that's why many of the residents are essentially obligated to take the highway - even if they don't want to. In an ideal world, they might choose to bike to work, but if the reality is such that they cannot do so due to the logistics of their situations, then only one form of transportation (the car via the highway) is possible. If the above is true, then the argument does not hold water.
Finally, is there a guarantee that the addition of a bicycle lane will not cause accidents and catastrophes that could lead to even more traffic on the highway? That is to say, it is possible that riding bicycles on the highway could engender accidents that could result in bigger traffics and deleterious situations that would also need to be addressed. If there is even a slight possibility that this could pose a risk to life, then the argument stated might need to be re-evaluated.
In conclusion, the argument, as it stands now, is considerably flawed due to its reliance on several unwarranted assumptions. If the author is able to answer the three questions above and offer more evidence (perhaps in the form of a systematic research study), then it will be possible to fully evaluate the viability of the proposed recommendation to add a bike lane to Blue Highway.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 5 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 481 350
No. of Characters: 2319 1500
No. of Different Words: 233 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.683 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.821 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.756 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 154 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 129 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 88 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 57 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.316 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.785 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.842 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.313 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.549 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.069 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 90, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[2]
Message: The verb 'can' requires the base form of the verb: 'circumstance'
Suggestion: circumstance
...roughly comparable? In other words, can circumstances from one highway be used to make genera...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 384, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: that's
...from home to work is over 15 miles, and thats why many of the residents are essential...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 477, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...ated to take the highway - even if they dont want to. In an ideal world, they might ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, well, whereas, in conclusion, as well as, first of all, in other words, that is to say
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 55.5748502994 126% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2376.0 2260.96107784 105% => OK
No of words: 480.0 441.139720559 109% => OK
Chars per words: 4.95 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68069463864 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83165760804 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 237.0 204.123752495 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.49375 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 745.2 705.55239521 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.7039325069 57.8364921388 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.052631579 119.503703932 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.2631578947 23.324526521 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.10526315789 5.70786347227 142% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.136994966019 0.218282227539 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0423602508419 0.0743258471296 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0440147894895 0.0701772020484 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0746401262258 0.128457276422 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0338592856915 0.0628817314937 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 14.3799401198 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.73 12.5979740519 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.43 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 98.500998004 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.