The following appeared as a letter to the editor from the owner of a skate shop in Central Plaza.
"Two years ago the city council voted to prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. They claimed that skateboard users were responsible for litter and vandalism that were keeping other visitors from coming to the plaza. In the past two years, however, there has been only a small increase in the number of visitors to Central Plaza, and litter and vandalism are still problematic. Skateboarding is permitted in Monroe Park, however, and there is no problem with litter or vandalism there. In order to restore Central Plaza to its former glory, then, we recommend that the city lift its prohibition on skateboarding in the plaza."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The author in his letter recommends to permit skateboarding in Central Plaza since banning it two years ago did not result in a significant increase in the visitors. He also mentions that city council put a ban on skateboarders on the premise that they were responsible for littering and vandalism. There are a number of questions that need to answered to fully evaluate the author’s argument and before his recommendation is implemented.
First information we need to figure out is whether there was a decrease in vandalism and uncleanliness right after skateboarding was prohibited in the Central plaza? Littering can be a nuisance to everyone including the shops owners as well as the visitors. If a decrease was noticed perhaps skateboarders indeed were responsible for dirtying the place which no doubt would have negatively impacted the customer base. Furthermore, in such a case unbanning would again deteriorate the plaza’s environment and turn customers off.
Second, we need to find out if any plazas or stores opened in the vicinity of Central plaza that could be attracting the plaza’s customers and resulting in low number of visitors to the plaza? The author mentions that after prohibiting the skateboarding in the plaza there was indeed an increase in shoppers which gives support to the claim that some visitors were indeed turned off by skateboarding.However, he mentions that the increase was small. The small increase could be because of extra competition that plaza may be facing from nearby plaza or mall being opened. Hence, it is important to find out whether it is the extra competition causing low increase or just the banning of skateboarding.
Third, we need to know if the plaza is equipped with dealing vandalism and increase in rubbish that may result from allowing skateboarding? The author assumes that since Monroe Plaza allows skateboarding and there is no litter or vandalism over there, therefore the same can apply to Central Plaza. Monroe Plaza can be contacted for further information about how they handle vandalism or uncleanliness that arises from skateboarding and the same methods can perhaps be implemented by Central Plaza.
In conclusion, a number of questions need to be answered ,to assess the viability of the author’s recommendation, such as did any new mall open in the vicinity, was there a reduction in uncleanliness and vandalism after banning skateboarding, and whether Central Plaza is equipped to handle if any such situation arises in case of allowing skateboarding?
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 15 15
No. of Words: 409 350
No. of Characters: 2088 1500
No. of Different Words: 176 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.497 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.105 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.004 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 150 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 117 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 89 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 56 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 27.267 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.162 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.8 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.377 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.575 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.169 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 26, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'recommends permitting'.
Suggestion: recommends permitting
The author in his letter recommends to permit skateboarding in Central Plaza since ba...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 534, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s;s environment and turn customers off. Second, we need to find out if any plaza...
^^^^^
Line 6, column 406, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: However
...were indeed turned off by skateboarding.However, he mentions that the increase was smal...
^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 708, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e or just the banning of skateboarding. Third, we need to know if the plaza is e...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 500, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...erhaps be implemented by Central Plaza. In conclusion, a number of questions nee...
^^^^
Line 10, column 57, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
... number of questions need to be answered ,to assess the viability of the author&ap...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, may, second, so, therefore, third, well, in conclusion, no doubt, such as, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 55.5748502994 106% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2155.0 2260.96107784 95% => OK
No of words: 408.0 441.139720559 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.2818627451 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49433085973 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.22857944767 2.78398813304 116% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 204.123752495 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.450980392157 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 675.0 705.55239521 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => 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: 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: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.0363091448 57.8364921388 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 143.666666667 119.503703932 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.2 23.324526521 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.73333333333 5.70786347227 153% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => 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: 0.384829022712 0.218282227539 176% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.139396966025 0.0743258471296 188% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0770389395087 0.0701772020484 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.226442961196 0.128457276422 176% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0687508238162 0.0628817314937 109% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.0 14.3799401198 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.61 48.3550499002 74% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 12.197005988 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.64 12.5979740519 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.3 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 98.500998004 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 12.3882235529 125% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 11.9071856287 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.