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 i

Essay topics:

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.

The author suggests that the government should take up education program that informs the bicyclists about the other factors that they should consider necessary for bicycly safety other than using helmets. The author comes to this conclusion based on one study which showed an increase in helmets usage to 80 percent and another study which found out that the bicycle accidents increased by 200 percent. However, before the recomendation can be properly evaluated, one would require answers to the following question.

Firstly, how accurate are the two studies? The author does not provide any details about how the two studies were carried out. There is a possibility that the two studies were carried out by two different firms and the methodology used by the two firms varied remarkably. Further, it is possible that while one firm was able to accurately measure the increased usage of the helments, the other firm chose a small sample or a biased sample to estimate the increase in the number of bicycle accidents and hence, arrived at an incorrect number. If the above turns out to be true, then the author's conclusion that the number of bicycle accidents increased even with the increased usage of the helmets does not hold water.

Secondly, do the bicylists wearing helmets feel safer than otherwise? The author prematurely assumes that bicylists wearing helmets feel safer and are incited to take more risks which is the cause for the increased number of bicycle accidents. However, the author neither quotes any study nor any reason for him to arrive at such conclusion. It is highly possible that people who take precautions such as wearing helmets are extra cautios and are always alert to avert any accident. Thus, such common behavior of humans to be more prudent while using safety measures invalidates the author's assertion.

Finally, how effective can the education program be? A government can proactively develop an education program to educate bicyclists about other factors that can help reduce accidents. However, if the bicyclists do not show much interest in attending such program or they can't accomodate time for such program, the government's effort would be futile. If the above scenario turns out to be true, then the author's argument is significantly weakened.

Therefore, the argument, as it stands, is unpersuasive as the author does not provide any information addressing the above posed questions. One will be in a better position to evaluate the argument if the author can provide answers to the above questions in a pellucid manner leaving no room for ambiguity.

Votes
Average: 4.3 (2 votes)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 587, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...he above turns out to be true, then the authors conclusion that the number of bicycle a...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 584, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...e using safety measures invalidates the authors assertion. Finally, how effective ca...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 273, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...erest in attending such program or they cant accomodate time for such program, the g...
^^^^
Line 7, column 316, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'governments'' or 'government's'?
Suggestion: governments'; government's
...t accomodate time for such program, the governments effort would be futile. If the above sc...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 405, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...scenario turns out to be true, then the authors argument is significantly weakened. ...
^^^^^^^
Line 10, column 256, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a pellucid manner" with adverb for "pellucid"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
... provide answers to the above questions in a pellucid manner leaving no room for ambiguity.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, firstly, hence, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, while, such as

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 28.8173652695 59% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 55.5748502994 83% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2187.0 2260.96107784 97% => OK
No of words: 424.0 441.139720559 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15801886792 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.53775939005 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6401013346 2.78398813304 95% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 204.123752495 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.481132075472 0.468620217663 103% => OK
syllable_count: 702.0 705.55239521 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.2862107306 57.8364921388 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.105263158 119.503703932 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3157894737 23.324526521 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.47368421053 5.70786347227 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.127881790595 0.218282227539 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0442185945814 0.0743258471296 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0423482728514 0.0701772020484 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0692171889839 0.128457276422 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.05087627061 0.0628817314937 81% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.3550499002 84% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.5979740519 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.6 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 98.500998004 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 3 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 9 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 424 350
No. of Characters: 2139 1500
No. of Different Words: 198 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.538 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.045 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.571 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 167 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 131 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 78 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 51 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.316 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.744 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.684 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.333 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.568 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.146 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5