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.
While it is commendable that the writer means good will and are just trying to ameliorate the declining sale of the Central Plaza. However, his argument to put all the blame on skateboarder is rife with holes and assumptions, and hence, not strong enough to lead to the prohibition of skateboarding.
First and foremost, it is assumptive to conclude that skateboarding is the reason for the drop in the number of customers going to the plaza. In fact, there are a number of factors that have yet to be accounted for such as the introduction of a much more convenient online shopping in recent years or citizens moving away for economic reasons. Unless there is a validated research on the issue, it is still equivocal to determine the true catalyses behind the decline in sale.
Secondly, the writer accuses skateboarders for littering and vandalism throughout the mall and yet, this is still just an assumption without any trustworthy evidences. As the matter of fact, there can be a number of possibilities needed to be put into consideration. For example, the culprits behind excessive littering could have been careless goers or the cleaning staff not being diligent enough and vandalism could just have been an aftermath of a robbery. In order to construct a more cogent argument, visual evidences are crucial.
Finally, the prediction of the plaza’s business will increase by prohibiting skateboarders bases upon no validate statistics whatsoever. Even if there are no longer any skateboarders, the business might not spring up if the quality of the products shows no improvement or the price is too exorbitant for normal consumers. Moreover, skateboarders, in fact, are potential customers as well since they may enter the plaza for snacks or refreshment after playing. Furthermore, if we give them even better treatments, for example free food sample at the front gate, might persuade these special customers to invite their friends to the plaza, hence save the plaza a huge amount of money for advertising.
In conclusion, it would be imprudent and unfair to execute such prohibition without deeper consideration. The writer’s argument should be provided with more validated evidence in order not to turn into a spurious calumny.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- OK, also need to argue '...will return to its previously high levels'
----------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 5.0 out of 6
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 15 15
No. of Words: 365 350
No. of Characters: 1834 1500
No. of Different Words: 205 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.371 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.025 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.903 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 130 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 99 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 79 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 54 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.333 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.578 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.8 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.304 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.589 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.045 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 361, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[3]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'validated research'.
Suggestion: validated research
...y for economic reasons. Unless there is a validated research on the issue, it is still equivocal to ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, still, well, while, for example, in conclusion, in fact, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 13.6137724551 22% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 28.8173652695 49% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 55.5748502994 90% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1898.0 2260.96107784 84% => OK
No of words: 365.0 441.139720559 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.2 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37092360658 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05596758606 2.78398813304 110% => OK
Unique words: 209.0 204.123752495 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.572602739726 0.468620217663 122% => OK
syllable_count: 593.1 705.55239521 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.8292826724 57.8364921388 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.533333333 119.503703932 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.3333333333 23.324526521 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.0 5.70786347227 175% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.125868348175 0.218282227539 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0424904240808 0.0743258471296 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0490454835496 0.0701772020484 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0664593329959 0.128457276422 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0385452570501 0.0628817314937 61% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 14.3799401198 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.18 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.2 8.32208582834 111% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 98.500998004 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => 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.