The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Balmer Island Gazette.
"On Balmer Island, where mopeds serve as a popular form of transportation, the population increases to 100,000 during the summer months. To reduce the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians, the town council of Balmer Island should limit the number of mopeds rented by the island's moped rental companies from 50 per day to 25 per day during the summer season. By limiting the number of rentals, the town council will attain the 50 percent annual reduction in moped accidents that was achieved last year on the neighboring island of Seaville, when Seaville's town council enforced similar limits on moped rentals."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
It might seem logical, at first glance, to agree with the writer that recommends cutdown the rate of mopeds renting to 50% could definitely leads us to have the half of the accidents occurred in Balmer Island. However, the author relies on what might be less credible evidences or even unproven assumptions to support his assertation, that I will distinguish.
First of all, the letter readily assumes that there was a restriction on rentals only in summer last year in Seaville Island. So, if the majority of accidents have had happened on the other seasons or caused by individuals who owned a moped themselves, this limitation would not halve accidents. Even assuming that all of the accidents have had happened in the summer, it would not necessarily mean that the reduced rented motors lead to a reduction of 50% in accidents. The author assumes that only by deploying changes in rental systems in order to reduce the rented mopeds by half is necessary and enough to bring safe and reduce the accidents by 50%. Absent any explanation of how other factors could affect the accidents between motorcycles and pedestrians, I simply cannot accept the author claim.
Secondly, the author also points out that the results that are going to be achieved in Balmer are as the same as the results of their neighbor. This again is a weak and unsupported claim as it does not demonstrate any clear correlation, neither geographically nor in terms of time, between the two islands. To illustrate further, the accidents may also be caused or reduced by other factors as well such as the population or climate of the two islands may be different and play roles in accidents. In other words, the infrastructure development or even good and clear weathers at the time may also play a role in reducing the accidents in Seaville island. without ruling out this reason, the letter, simply cannot justify its suggestion.
Finally, one more problem with the argument involves this delicate fact that maybe Ballmer has owned three times motor rental companies more than the other island, but only a few of them rent motors more than 25 per day in which this reduction from 50 to 25 is not going to make significant changes in accidents. Also, note that only the nearest island has reported a 50% reduction in motor vehicle accidents and no pedestrian-related motor vehicle accidents, which indicates that a 50% reduction in motor vehicle accidents does not mean a 50% reduction in motor vehicle accidents too.
In conclusion, the author’s argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it further, the author must provide more concrete evidence, perhaps by way of a detailed analysis of the whole range of external and internal factors involving in accidents. Finally, to better assess the argument, it would be necessary to know more information about what other parameters and under what circumstances caused the accidents across both islands. Without these changes, the argument is implausible and the reasoning is faulty.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 502 350
No. of Characters: 2454 1500
No. of Different Words: 242 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.733 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.888 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.72 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 182 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 134 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 89 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 61 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 29.529 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.639 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.647 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.33 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.578 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.089 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 141, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'could' requires the base form of the verb: 'lead'
Suggestion: lead
... mopeds renting to 50% could definitely leads us to have the half of the accidents oc...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 316, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...not halve accidents. Even assuming that all of the accidents have had happened in the summ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 657, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Without
...ucing the accidents in Seaville island. without ruling out this reason, the letter, sim...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, well, in conclusion, such as, first of all, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 11.1786427146 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 28.8173652695 108% => OK
Preposition: 71.0 55.5748502994 128% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2524.0 2260.96107784 112% => OK
No of words: 502.0 441.139720559 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.02788844622 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.7334296765 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81324344153 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 247.0 204.123752495 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.49203187251 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 786.6 705.55239521 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.22255489022 237% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.0487609763 57.8364921388 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.222222222 119.503703932 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.8888888889 23.324526521 120% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.94444444444 5.70786347227 122% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => OK
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: 0.140671594835 0.218282227539 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0457858885404 0.0743258471296 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0408297855165 0.0701772020484 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0783985933456 0.128457276422 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0415138892027 0.0628817314937 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 14.3799401198 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 48.3550499002 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.19 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.78 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 121.0 98.500998004 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => 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.