The following appeared as a letter to the editor from a Central Plaza store owner.
"Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central Plaza store owners believe that the decrease in their business is due to the number of skateboard users in the plaza. There has also been a dramatic increase in the amount of litter and vandalism throughout the plaza. Thus, we recommend that the city prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. If skateboarding is prohibited here, we predict that business in Central Plaza will return to its previously high levels."
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.
In the letter to the editor, it is stated that skateboarders are the actual reason behind the steady decline in the shopkeeper businesses and if the skateboarding is prohibited in the plaza, they can return to its previous high-level state. The author has come to this conclusion based on the observation that an increase in the population of skateboarders, resulted in an increase in the amount of litter and vandalism throughout the plaza. However, before this action can be properly evaluated, three questions need to be answered.
Firstly, do the skateboarders are the actual reason behind the downfall in the business? In other words, there can be several other reasons behind this downfall. For instance, it is possible that a new highway is being constructed near the Central plaza and it is causing a lot of pollution and noise due to which people are avoiding traveling to the mall. Further, the Steady decline in popularity can also be a result of an increase in competition. It is possible that a new better mall has launched in the city and people are choosing to go there due to its better design, better parking facility, or availability of child care. In addition, maybe the people who are still coming to the mall are because of these skateboarders. They may be their parents, friends, or skateboarding enthusiasts. Hence, skateboarders' banishment will actually affect the shopkeepers' business more. If the above argument has merit, the drawn conclusion is significantly weakened.
Secondly, are skateboarders the actual reason behind the dramatic increase in litter and vandalism? For instance, it is possible that the other shopkeepers are actually dumping their waste at inappropriate places. Or in general, increased crime in the city is an actual reason behind burgeoning vandalism. If this is true, banning the skateboarders will not have any effect on the sales of shopkeepers. Moreover, this action can be seen as grudge towards cities' skateboarders, and may even result in more discontentment, resulting in further decline.
Lastly, even if authorities ban the skateboarders, does it guarantee the situation to become normal again? In other words, even if we assume that skateboarders are the actual reason behind the whole charade, it is possible that people will still avoid the central Plaza. Mainly, because they don't know anything about skateboarders ban or just that in between this whole process, they have found another place to spend their time, then it would pose a serious threat to the validity of the argument, thus weakening its inevitability.
In conclusion, the argument as stated is flawed due to its reliance on several unwarranted assumptions. If the author is able to answer the above three questions and offer more evidence and contextual information then it might be possible to evaluate the viability of the proposed action to prohibit the skateboarders from the Central Plaza.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 474 350
No. of Characters: 2395 1500
No. of Different Words: 218 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.666 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.053 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.933 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 182 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 126 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 97 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 57 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.545 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.667 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.909 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.298 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.477 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.043 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...three questions need to be answered. Firstly, do the skateboarders are the ac...
^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...onclusion is significantly weakened. Secondly, are skateboarders the actual r...
^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tment, resulting in further decline. Lastly, even if authorities ban the skat...
^^^^
Line 7, column 297, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...the central Plaza. Mainly, because they dont know anything about skateboarders ban o...
^^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t, thus weakening its inevitability. In conclusion, the argument as stated is...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, first, firstly, hence, however, if, lastly, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, still, then, thus, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, in general, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.6327345309 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 36.0 28.8173652695 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 63.0 55.5748502994 113% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2465.0 2260.96107784 109% => OK
No of words: 473.0 441.139720559 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.21141649049 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.66353547975 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0434077555 2.78398813304 109% => OK
Unique words: 222.0 204.123752495 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.469344608879 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 771.3 705.55239521 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.0528548795 57.8364921388 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.045454545 119.503703932 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5 23.324526521 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.36363636364 5.70786347227 147% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.135470781848 0.218282227539 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0403115411408 0.0743258471296 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0476404429918 0.0701772020484 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0875304760444 0.128457276422 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.025001814647 0.0628817314937 40% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.5979740519 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.52 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 115.0 98.500998004 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 12.3882235529 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.