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.
The editorial from the central plaza owner infers that the plaza will be returned to their previously high levels by prohibiting the skateboarding in it. But this argument is rife with holes and assumptions, and thus not strong enough to lead to the conclusion given by plaza’s owner.
First of all, before accusing the skateboarding for decreasing the sale of other shops, the reason behind its popularity must be known. What if it is the only club in that area? Or what if it is the most affordable one from the whole plaza? Or maybe it provides many more amenities to its customers to their costs(fees). For example, may be to achieve more sells, the owner (of skateboarding) releases some new methods, thereby gives a good amount of discount in various forms such as by a decrease in fees, by offering an extra month for training, or they may give free skateboards to the customers for training. So, if this is true, then it renders the author’s claim about prohibiting skateboarding.
Secondly, the writer blames the consumers of skateboarding for increase of waste in the plaza. But probably this assumption is wrong because of some reasons below. The argument does not prove the writer’s assumption right. Because what if the shopkeepers of the plaza are irresponsible from their duties towards environment? Or what if there are no dustbins to throw any garbage? As a citizen, it is their duty to keep their places neat and clean. Now talking about the vandalization, it is not necessary that it would be done by skateboarder’s customers. There are possibilities that defacement is done by others. It may be done by any stray animals. So, either of this scenarios have merit, then conclusion fall down.
And lastly, the argument stated that the sales of others are diminished due to increasing demand of skating. However, what if the quality of other seller’s goods were deteriorated? Or may be their stores were not being easily reachable to the customers. For instance, the plaza has four floor and having only stairs, no elevator. Therefore some consumers having characteristics like old age, lack of time, or diseases(asthma, any problem related to heart/lungs) are unable to take stairs instead of the elevator. Consequently, their market falls.
In conclusion, the argument, as it stands now, is considerably flawed due to its reliance on several unwarranted assumptions. If the author is able to answer the above questions and provides some more detailed information then it will be possible to accept the writer’s claim regarding prohibition of skateboarding to improve the market of the other venders.
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: 26 15
No. of Words: 435 350
No. of Characters: 2121 1500
No. of Different Words: 234 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.567 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.876 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.856 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 137 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 105 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 80 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 52 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 16.731 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.82 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.808 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.244 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.244 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.055 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 666, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...one by any stray animals. So, either of this scenarios have merit, then conclusion f...
^^^^
Line 4, column 330, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...or and having only stairs, no elevator. Therefore some consumers having characteristics l...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 223, Rule ID: LESS_MORE_THEN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'than'?
Suggestion: than
...provides some more detailed information then it will be possible to accept the write...
^^^^
Line 5, column 360, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...mprove the market of the other venders.
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, first, however, if, lastly, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, for example, for instance, in conclusion, such as, talking about, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 13.6137724551 37% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 31.0 28.8173652695 108% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 55.5748502994 108% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2198.0 2260.96107784 97% => OK
No of words: 434.0 441.139720559 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06451612903 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56428161445 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01586058449 2.78398813304 108% => OK
Unique words: 234.0 204.123752495 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.539170506912 0.468620217663 115% => OK
syllable_count: 681.3 705.55239521 97% => 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: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 10.0 1.67365269461 597% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 19.7664670659 132% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.8473053892 70% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 59.2512951448 57.8364921388 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 84.5384615385 119.503703932 71% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.6923076923 23.324526521 72% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.15384615385 5.70786347227 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.145928491661 0.218282227539 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0362041067204 0.0743258471296 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0557116657027 0.0701772020484 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0885267452582 0.128457276422 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0722761566908 0.0628817314937 115% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.7 14.3799401198 74% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 48.3550499002 114% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.77 12.5979740519 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.43 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 110.0 98.500998004 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.1389221557 75% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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.