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 following argument is seriously flawed for numerous reasons. In essence, the argument is based on the unwarranted conjecture that business in Central Plaza has gone down due to increasing popularity of skateboard users, rendering its main crux, that the precluding to skateboard in the arena would resuscitate their business to its previously high level, invalid.
The argument fails to endow any justification that the falling business is exactly the cause of burgeoning skateboard users in the Central Plaza. For one, the area might have been more convenient and apt for skateboarding, with no viable relation with buying or shopping in the plaza. Admittedly, the plaza might be struggling to provide high quality items and due to which shoppers might have found their new destinations. More significantly, the argument also fails to consider the price. Has it inflated over the past two years? Or maybe they have compromised on their previously seemly customer care and service. Had the argument maintained detailed exegesis on aforementioned conditions? Even then, the argument would have to further expound that, skateboard users are the only cause for their business downfall.
The argument also leaves room for plethora of other unanswered questions. Perhaps the important one is that whether or not skateboard users have resulted in litters and vandalism in and around the plaza. The argument seems weak to present meticulous judgments on the type of people that come around the plaza on daily basis. There is pronounced chance that children’s who come to visit the plaza would have caused litters. In addition, the security system of the plaza might not have been strong enough. It is thus quite possible that notorious teenagers or college students might have encroached upon the plaza boundary and cause deliberate destruction of glasses, flower pots and so on. How can author simply assume that occluding skateboard use in and around the plaza would reduce litters and vandalism when the activity might have been entirely unrelated with them?
All things considered, because the argument makes several unwarranted assumptions, it fails to make a convincing case that prohibition of skateboard use would result in revamping their business.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- ???
----------------
minimum 3 arguments wanted.
----------------------
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: 18 15
No. of Words: 355 350
No. of Characters: 1865 1500
No. of Different Words: 195 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.341 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.254 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.721 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 128 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 107 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 85 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 52 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.722 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.591 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.278 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.341 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.499 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.106 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 109, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...ions. Perhaps the important one is that whether or not skateboard users have resulted in litte...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, may, so, then, thus, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.6327345309 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 28.8173652695 76% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 55.5748502994 79% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1916.0 2260.96107784 85% => OK
No of words: 355.0 441.139720559 80% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.39718309859 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34067318298 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82621839471 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 204.123752495 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.546478873239 0.468620217663 117% => OK
syllable_count: 595.8 705.55239521 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 61.1674740082 57.8364921388 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.444444444 119.503703932 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7222222222 23.324526521 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.33333333333 5.70786347227 41% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => 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: 0.17401211266 0.218282227539 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.055390717626 0.0743258471296 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0466208162441 0.0701772020484 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.10201551565 0.128457276422 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0499975621724 0.0628817314937 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 48.3550499002 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.04 12.5979740519 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.03 8.32208582834 109% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 98.500998004 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => 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.