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 bicycle-related accidents 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, to reduce the number of serious injuries from bicycle accidents, the government should concentrate more on educating people about bicycle safety and less on encouraging or requiring bicyclists to wear helmets."
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
In the given article the writer talked about a nationwide study which conclude two statements. One of them is in ten-year the number of bicyclist wear helmet increased from 35 percent to 80 percent. Secondly during the same ten-year period, the number of bicycle-related accidents has increased 200 percent. The writer feels that because of helmet the bicyclist take more risk and ride rashly and to reduce accidents the government should concentrate more on bicycle safety and less on encouraging or requiring bicyclists to wear helmets. The assumptions are fallacious and writer needs to analysis it before jumping to conclusion.
Moreover, the study shows that there are 80 percent people wear helmet it means who wear helmet is safe from serious injuries. Secondly there are bicycle accidents increased 200 percent which does not indicate that people get serious injury in accident. The nationwide study presents survey data of two different situations which are not related to each other. One more important point which should be considered is the study has done in last ten years. In tenure of ten years there are different factors has been changed such as population, number of bicyclists, condition of road and many more. The writer must consider the validity of study before making it basis of argument. Number of bicyclists who wear helmet reached to 80 percent and still 20 percent don't use helmet. So, the government should encourage 20 percent people to wear helmet during ride.
Additionally, as mentioned above there are different reasons of road accidents, but the writer focused on helmet. There is need to analyze the accidents because it will help to find the reason. If maximum accidents happened in rainy season, then the bicyclist may have difficulty in riding because of slippery roads. These two are different things that increased in accidents and wearing helmet. The writer did not talk about number of serious injuries in accidents. It may plausible that there are less serious injuries in accidents due to helmet. The facts behind the argument is not clear so the conclusion made by writer is not likely to accept. The government should work on both aspects firstly work for road safety and another is to encourage people to wear helmet which help to save people from serious injuries.
Furthermore, the writer feels with wearing helmet people take risks more. This statement is writers feeling which does not have any solid facts, so we cannot agree with it. Other than it the writer also said the government should educate people about bicycle safety and ignore the driving of other vehicles on road. The accidents may happen because of cars and other heavy vehicles mistake and writer only talks about bicycle. So many times, we read in newspaper that truck crash the bicyclist or the car's rash driving hit a bicyclist. So, the government should work for road safety majors for all vehicle drivers not only for bicyclist. The writer assumes that with educating people about bicycle safety is enough to reduce to reduce bicycle-related accidents from 200 percent.
Finally, the writer assumed that with educating bicyclist about road safety is enough to decrease road accidents seems mistaken and the writer's reasoning for argument weaken because of above discussion. So, the government should collect strong evidences to decrease the road accidents related to bicyclist.
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: 30 15
No. of Words: 555 350
No. of Characters: 2802 1500
No. of Different Words: 227 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.854 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.049 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.486 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 228 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 149 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 96 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 69 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.5 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.649 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.633 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.315 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.469 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.125 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 761, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...ched to 80 percent and still 20 percent dont use helmet. So, the government should e...
^^^^
Line 7, column 374, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'vehicles'' or 'vehicle's'?
Suggestion: vehicles'; vehicle's
... happen because of cars and other heavy vehicles mistake and writer only talks about bic...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 716, Rule ID: PHRASE_REPETITION[1]
Message: This phrase is duplicated. You should probably leave only 'to reduce'.
Suggestion: to reduce
...g people about bicycle safety is enough to reduce to reduce bicycle-related accidents from 200 perc...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, firstly, furthermore, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, still, then, 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: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 75.0 55.5748502994 135% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2860.0 2260.96107784 126% => OK
No of words: 554.0 441.139720559 126% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16245487365 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.85151570047 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.54778006416 2.78398813304 92% => OK
Unique words: 235.0 204.123752495 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.424187725632 0.468620217663 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 888.3 705.55239521 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 16.0 8.76447105788 183% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 30.0 19.7664670659 152% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.0045676115 57.8364921388 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.3333333333 119.503703932 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.4666666667 23.324526521 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.66666666667 5.70786347227 64% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 8.20758483034 183% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => 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: 0.217385008959 0.218282227539 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0682078248503 0.0743258471296 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0721390926217 0.0701772020484 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.144385454642 0.128457276422 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.109301429441 0.0628817314937 174% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 14.3799401198 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.38 8.32208582834 89% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 98.500998004 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.