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 specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The author is making an interesting argument that the government has to concentrate on the education other than the usage of helmets for bicycle users’ safety. While the author is arguing on some studies from the future, we need so see more specific evidences in order to evaluate the argument from the author. There are unwarranted assumptions that the author has made and unevaluated evidences that may dismay the author’s argument.
First, we have to consider the degree of accidents. While the percent has increased compared to the second study, we do not know how serious was accidents specifically. As we can see from the first study that the number of helmet usage percentage has increased, we may consider although the number of accidents may have risen, there are possibility that while the number of accidents might have raised, the seriousness of individual injuries might have been decreased thanks to the increased usage of helmets. We need more figures and evidences from the second study, other than just simple percentage that can accurately show us how the seriousness of accidents. This evidence will weaken the author’s argument.
Moreover, we need to analyze whether the author’s argument that increased percent of bicycle users’ use of helmets had led to bicycle users’ feeling safety, which lead them to more accidents is true. It is true from the two studies that the author has mentioned; the percent of helmet usage and the percent of accidents have increased. However, we cannot simply conclude that the increased percent of helmet usage had lead to the increased percent of accidents, and the author’s unwarranted claim that bicycle users are riding recklessly due to the helmets alone. There are some alternative explanations possible. While the number of bicycle users has increased and the number of accidents also has increased compared to ten years ago, as the author has argued. However, there are other possibility that the accidents are the result of accidents with bicycles and cars that have lead by the lack of enough bicycle roads. Bicycle users had to use the same road with the cars, and that was the cause of the increased number of accidents. Moreover, we need to see how each accidents were resulted in order to see whether it was the bicycle user’s ignorance that had lead to increased number of accidents. This evaluation may weaken the author’s argument as well.
Last but not least, even the all the arguments that the author has made is true, we still need to concentrate on both usage of helmets and other education. Simply we have to educate bicycle users to use helmets and other important lessons that the author might argue in the future. This is because we do not know the exact number of each accident’s fatality rate and whether the usage of helmet has decreased the seriousness of each individual’s damage. There is no exactly specified evidence in the author’s argument that the helmet’s safeties. The author is only mentioning the increase in percent numbers. We need to see, despite all those numbers, that helmet is actually safe at first place. If helmets are saving the riders, then we can, despite the increased number of percent in both accidents and helmet usage, argue that it is important to make the riders to use helmets. Other education, if needed as the author is arguing, could applied to the users while we make those riders to use helmets first; we can do two things at the same time.
In conclusion, although the author’s argument might appealing at the first glance, there are many unspoken evidences that we need to evaluate in order to justify the author’s argument.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-24 | Technoblade | 58 | view |
| 2023-06-06 | kalp98403 | 16 | view |
| 2023-04-07 | poiuy23567 | 66 | view |
| 2023-03-09 | dxy40747 | 68 | view |
| 2023-02-11 | HSNDEK | 63 | view |
- The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station."Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increased time to national news and lesstime to weather and local news. During this time period, most of the compl 49
- The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company."According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than in any 54
- Some people believe it is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public. Others believe that the public has a right to be fully informed.Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns 77
- The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company."According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than in any 62
- The following appeared in an e-mail sent by the marketing director of the Classical Shakespeare Theatre of Bardville."Over the past ten years, there has been a 20 percent decline in the size of the average audience at Classical Shakespeare Theatre product 61
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK. The reason is that the number of bicyclists has increased.
argument 2 -- OK, but wordy
argument 3 -- not exactly. need to argue:
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.
----------------
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: 26 15
No. of Words: 613 350
No. of Characters: 2973 1500
No. of Different Words: 203 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.976 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.85 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.482 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 214 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 159 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 110 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 69 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.577 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.757 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.692 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.385 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.526 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.262 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 433, Rule ID: HAD_VBP[1]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'leaded', 'led'.
Suggestion: leaded; led
...e increased percent of helmet usage had lead to the increased percent of accidents, ...
^^^^
Line 4, column 961, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'could' requires the base form of the verb: 'apply'
Suggestion: apply
... needed as the author is arguing, could applied to the users while we make those riders...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, however, if, may, moreover, second, so, still, then, well, while, as to, in conclusion, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.9520958084 170% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 21.0 13.6137724551 154% => OK
Pronoun: 47.0 28.8173652695 163% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 75.0 55.5748502994 135% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3115.0 2260.96107784 138% => OK
No of words: 613.0 441.139720559 139% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.08156606852 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.97582523872 4.56307096286 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80450287133 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 215.0 204.123752495 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.350734094617 0.468620217663 75% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1001.7 705.55239521 142% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 16.0 4.96107784431 323% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 2.70958083832 295% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 19.7664670659 132% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.6565302711 57.8364921388 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.807692308 119.503703932 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5769230769 23.324526521 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.84615384615 5.70786347227 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 15.0 6.88822355289 218% => Less 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: 0.132985872849 0.218282227539 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0511985247847 0.0743258471296 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0363295649859 0.0701772020484 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0791930146546 0.128457276422 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0410591327986 0.0628817314937 65% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 14.3799401198 99% => 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: 12.48 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.43 8.32208582834 89% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 98.500998004 105% => 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?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
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.