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 aforementioned argument, the author of the letter has stated a decrease in the business of shopkeepers due to decrease in number of shoppers in Central Plaza with the dramatic increase in popularity of skateboarding. The sudden change has occurred over the past two years according to the author. The author further states that there has been an increase in litter and vandalism in throughout the plaza. Hence, the author recommends that the city should prohibit skateboarding which would eventually boost their business to previously held high levels. These recommendations and conclusion as set forth by the author of the letter seem illogical as the author has failed to provide legitimate reasoning and details about various aspects of consideration in the stated argument.
Firstly, the author claims that the popularity of skateboarding has decreased the business of shopkeepers in the Central Plaza due to decrease in number of shoppers. However, there have been no details mentioned about the location of this Plaza and what are the businesses running in these shops. The decrease in the number of customers may be due to various reasons like, the customers must’ve refrained from buying products sold in the sops in the Plaza, or they must have found an alternative to these shops where goods are sold at cheaper cost and better quality. We cannot assume that the increase in skateboarding has affected the businesses directly.
Skateboarding is a fun sport which is usually played among youngsters. The store owners that claim that skateboard users are affecting their business must first provide proper explanation regarding, in what ways is their business declining. No report on how have their businesses suffered in the past two years been provided in the argument. Moreover, who are these skateboard users, are they regular customers of the shops in Plaza should also be mentioned. A direct link between the business decline and skateboard users popularity seems absurd.
Next, the author mentions that there has been an increase in vandalism and litter throughout the Plaza. To support this claim, there is no solid evidence provided which may consist of certain police investigation report. Litter and vandalism seem like a serious issue and must be resolved immediately, but in order to get support regarding this claim the author should answer questions about the frequency of these events, when and where were such crimes committed and casualties if any, must be mentioned so that a proper proof is available.
Lastly, the author recommends that the city should prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza which would help raise their business to previously high levels. Here, there author abruptly provides prohibition of skateboarding as a solution to they plight. No strong evidence how could this step possibly lead to the desired solution has been provided.
Thus, considering the above mentioned points, if the author succeeds to provide a complete insight into their decline in business, details or statistics about their business deprecation, without directly blaming skateboard users, only then this argument can have a strong hold and all the necessary measures would be taken in order to bring their attempts to fruition.
Comments
Essay evaluation 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: 21 15
No. of Words: 519 350
No. of Characters: 2692 1500
No. of Different Words: 228 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.773 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.187 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.739 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 203 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 149 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 116 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 65 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.714 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 13.353 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.476 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.333 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.563 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.071 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, however, if, lastly, may, moreover, regarding, so, then, thus
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 28.8173652695 108% => OK
Preposition: 78.0 55.5748502994 140% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2760.0 2260.96107784 122% => OK
No of words: 518.0 441.139720559 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.32818532819 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.77070365392 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81738750729 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 237.0 204.123752495 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.457528957529 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 837.0 705.55239521 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 81.0287874714 57.8364921388 140% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.428571429 119.503703932 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.6666666667 23.324526521 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.52380952381 5.70786347227 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 8.20758483034 183% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.205523470428 0.218282227539 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0774025282098 0.0743258471296 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0734588928565 0.0701772020484 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.112428089294 0.128457276422 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0696363393228 0.0628817314937 111% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 14.3799401198 111% => 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: 13.93 12.5979740519 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.42 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 98.500998004 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.