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 recommendation states that the city prohibit skateboarding in central plaza due to the decrease of patron and increase in vandalism and littering. The plaza and business owners are making assumption about the cause of the disruption of client flow and are likely presenting their argument with negative bias towards the skateboarders. before the city makes a choice on this issue, it must ask and answer the following questions.
Firstly, is there a direct correlation between the skateboarding and the decrease of shoppers at central plaza? this question would help the city evaluate the recommendation because it gives empirically backed insight to the reality of central plaza. As stated in the introduction, central plaza and its tenants can have negative stigma towards skateboarders, therefore assuming that they are cause for the plaza’s demise. there is the possibility that skateboarders buy goods from the plaza; if that is the case, then prohibiting skateboarding will decrease sales and patronage even more than prior. Now, if the plaza has conducted a significant number of interviews with non-skateboarding patrons who have confirmed that they are not going to central plaza due to the increase in skateboarding, the case to prohibit skateboarding in the plaza becomes stronger.
Secondly, the city must ask the plaza if the skateboarders are the cause of littering and vandalism, or if there are other culprits. By asking this, the bias of the plaza and tenants is at question once more. it might be the case that the skateboarders are littering and vandalizing the property. if there is video proof or witnesses that confirm littering and vandalizing caused by skateboarders, then the plaza has a stronger case for their recommendation. However, there might be other groups of individuals or policies that can affect the rate of littering and vandalism. For example, if non-skateboarding young people are littering and vandalizing, then prohibiting skateboarding will probably do nothing. Also, if the budget for the police department is cut significantly, then petty crimes such the ones at hand might increase due to lower policing.
Overall, central plaza’s recommendation has the best interest of its tenant and patrons. Although it is logical that they want the prohibiting of skateboarding on their property empirically based question pertaining biases and stigmas must be addressed before the city makes a decision.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
also need to argue:
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.
----------------------
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: 12 15
No. of Words: 383 350
No. of Characters: 2022 1500
No. of Different Words: 169 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.424 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.279 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.135 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 139 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 113 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 86 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 56 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 31.917 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 13.696 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.415 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.624 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.109 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 340, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Before
...egative bias towards the skateboarders. before the city makes a choice on this issue, ...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 113, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: This
... decrease of shoppers at central plaza? this question would help the city evaluate t...
^^^^
Line 3, column 429, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: There
... are cause for the plaza's demise. there is the possibility that skateboarders b...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 210, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: It
...a and tenants is at question once more. it might be the case that the skateboarder...
^^
Line 5, column 298, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: If
...littering and vandalizing the property. if there is video proof or witnesses that ...
^^
Line 5, column 858, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d might increase due to lower policing. Overall, central plaza's recommenda...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, as to, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 11.1786427146 170% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 55.5748502994 67% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2081.0 2260.96107784 92% => OK
No of words: 383.0 441.139720559 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.43342036554 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.42384287591 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.2573180274 2.78398813304 117% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 204.123752495 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.477806788512 0.468620217663 102% => OK
syllable_count: 645.3 705.55239521 91% => 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: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 2.70958083832 295% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.1058658421 57.8364921388 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.411764706 119.503703932 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5294117647 23.324526521 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.41176470588 5.70786347227 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.252462639781 0.218282227539 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0946327986427 0.0743258471296 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0748261183591 0.0701772020484 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.162159315848 0.128457276422 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0906096879593 0.0628817314937 144% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 14.3799401198 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.3550499002 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.51 12.5979740519 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.81 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 98.500998004 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.