The following appeared in a health newsletter.
"A ten-year nationwide study of the effectiveness of wearing a helmet while bicycling indicates that ten years ago, approximately 35 percent of all bicyclists reported wearing helmets, whereas today that number is nearly 80 percent. Another study, however, suggests that during the same ten-year period, the number of accidents caused by bicycling has increased 200 percent. These results demonstrate that bicyclists feel safer because they are wearing helmets, and they take more risks as a result. Thus, there is clearly a call for the government to strive to reduce the number of serious injuries from bicycle accidents by launching an education program that concentrates on the factors other than helmet use that are necessary for bicycle safety."
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.
As per the health newsletter, the dramatic increase in the number of the accidents in recent years is due to the fact that, riders feel safe after wearing helmets, and tend to take more risks. The author takes into account following three assumptions while coming to this conclusion.
Firstly, the author stated that a nationwide study conducted regarding the effectiveness of the helmets would provide acceptable and worthwhile results. As per the study, the number of bicyclists reported wearing helmets rose from 35 percent to 80 percent, but no evidence is provided regarding the authenticity of this study. Maybe the bicyclists reported wearing helmets, just to help themselves, not getting caught breaking the law. Thus, the low evidence regarding the authenticity of the study of effectiveness of wearing helmets, the author's conclusions are not valid.
Secondly, even if the above study is accounted, the author states another study, which states that the number of the accidents rose by 200 percent. There are numerous assumptions which are taken into account while concluding from this theory. The study does not take into account the rise in traffic, which may also be a factor in the increase in the number of accidents. Also, the terrain on which the accidents occurred is also discounted. As the riders, riding in difficult terrains are more vulnerable towards accidents. All these assumptions regarding the study needs to substantiated with evidence and reasoning for the author's argument to hold water.
Finally, the authors presents that an education program launched by the government for edifying the riders regarding the safety will cause the number of accidents to decrease. This presents an assumption that only factors concerning the riders are responsible for the fatalities. It discounts the other factors like traffic control, road safety, quality of infrastructure. Even after the edification, if the roads are of poor quality the accidents will keep on rising. If there are no proper norms in place regarding the road safety, it will also support the increase in number of accidents. Therefore, authors needs to provide more evidence that factors concerning riders are responsible for accidents, and his/her conclusion is not valid.
In conclusion, the author's assertion that increase in number of accidents in recent years is due the factors involving the riders taking more risk is flawed. The author needs to substantiate the argument with more evidence which will help in elucidating the argument more effectively.
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: 4 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 403 350
No. of Characters: 2099 1500
No. of Different Words: 176 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.48 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.208 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.733 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 161 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 126 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 89 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 60 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.15 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.247 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.7 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.337 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.549 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.101 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 627, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ted with evidence and reasoning for the authors argument to hold water. Finally, the...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 20, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ion is not valid. In conclusion, the authors assertion that increase in number of ac...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, firstly, if, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, while, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 28.8173652695 59% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 55.5748502994 106% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2157.0 2260.96107784 95% => OK
No of words: 402.0 441.139720559 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.36567164179 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.47771567384 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82768427717 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 180.0 204.123752495 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.44776119403 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 662.4 705.55239521 94% => 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: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.3185758999 57.8364921388 58% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 107.85 119.503703932 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.1 23.324526521 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.05 5.70786347227 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.166873039033 0.218282227539 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0513757126757 0.0743258471296 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.056952112038 0.0701772020484 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.101393305053 0.128457276422 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.084279133124 0.0628817314937 134% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.87 12.5979740519 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.2 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 98.500998004 92% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => 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.