The argument presented by the author sounds good and appears reasonable at first glance: as the author states that the amount of money collected from the taxes, is spent on public schools in higher proportion in the Parson City than in Blue City, thus, Parson City residents offer a better education in public schools than do Blue City residents. However, as more light is shed on the issue and more detailed facts are concerned, it is easy to point that the argument is rife with holes and suffers from several fallacious assumptions.
Firstly, citing at the statement presented by the author that despite the number of residents being the same in both the cities, Parson City has spent almost twice of its revenue for its public schools than did Blue City. Here, the author makes a clear assumption that the number of residents being the same, the number of students will be the same. In fact, this cannot be the case. The Parson City might have more students than the Blue City, thus, indulging Parson City to spent more of its revenue in public schools compared to that of Blue City.
Moreover, even if it is the case that the number of students are almost same and even though Blue City does spend lesser than the Parson City spent for its public schools. Thus that really mean that Parson City residents are more concerned for its public schools than that of the residents of the Blue City? Here, the author juxtaposed the two cities based on the statistics of a particular single year. There is every possibility that in the previous years the Blue City has used up much of its revenues in rejuvenating and improving the infrastructures of its public schools and they do not require much of financial support in the current year as anything required is already obtained. This may not be the case with Parson City.
Lastly, the author makes a clear assumption that the Parson City residents pays higher importance to quality education in public schools as compared to that of Blue City residents. The author bases this point merely on just one assumption that the Parson City residents use its revenue on public school development more than that of Blue City residents do. The author before stating the point does not focuses on any of the other factors and possibilities in the two cities. There can be a possible instance in the Blue City that the number of students opting to go to a public school are less compared to that of those who prefer private schools and the reversal might be the case with Parson City.
In order to bolster the argument, the author has to present more cogent and concrete evidences regarding the student population and their preference over private and public schools. He/she should also present the previous years record of spending on public schools in both the cities. Thus, the unsubstantiated assumptions made by the author makes his/her argument weaker and open to debate.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 173, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...rson City spent for its public schools. Thus that really mean that Parson City resid...
^^^^
Line 7, column 403, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[3]
Message: The verb 'does' requires base form of the verb: 'focus'
Suggestion: focus
...uthor before stating the point does not focuses on any of the other factors and possibi...
^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'first', 'firstly', 'however', 'if', 'lastly', 'may', 'moreover', 'really', 'regarding', 'so', 'thus', 'as to', 'in fact']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.277264325323 0.25644967241 108% => OK
Verbs: 0.134935304991 0.15541462614 87% => OK
Adjectives: 0.097966728281 0.0836205057962 117% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0480591497227 0.0520304965353 92% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0221811460259 0.0272364105082 81% => OK
Prepositions: 0.149722735675 0.125424944231 119% => OK
Participles: 0.0425138632163 0.0416121511921 102% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.41098045431 2.79052419416 86% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0203327171904 0.026700313972 76% => OK
Particles: 0.00184842883549 0.001811407834 102% => OK
Determiners: 0.133086876155 0.113004496875 118% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0129390018484 0.0255425247493 51% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00369685767098 0.0127820249294 29% => Some subClauses wanted starting by 'Which, Who, What, Whom, Whose.....'
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2924.0 2731.13054187 107% => OK
No of words: 504.0 446.07635468 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.80158730159 6.12365571057 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.73813722054 4.57801047555 103% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.343253968254 0.378187486979 91% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.214285714286 0.287650121315 74% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.140873015873 0.208842608468 67% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.0912698412698 0.135150697306 68% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.41098045431 2.79052419416 86% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 207.018472906 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.394841269841 0.469332199767 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 44.7066768265 52.1807786196 86% => OK
How many sentences: 18.0 20.039408867 90% => OK
Sentence length: 28.0 23.2022227129 121% => OK
Sentence length SD: 75.8992387606 57.7814097925 131% => OK
Chars per sentence: 162.444444444 141.986410481 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.0 23.2022227129 121% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.777777777778 0.724660767414 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 3.58251231527 56% => OK
Readability: 49.4285714286 51.9672348444 95% => OK
Elegance: 2.28828828829 1.8405768891 124% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.617856931256 0.441005458295 140% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.17143627599 0.135418324435 127% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.110380095952 0.0829849096947 133% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.657787240884 0.58762219726 112% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.14479895765 0.147661913831 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.335473238553 0.193483328276 173% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.111376673662 0.0970749176394 115% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.606652461817 0.42659136922 142% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.11877477763 0.0774707102158 153% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.493324862946 0.312017818177 158% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.086243936568 0.0698173142475 124% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.33743842365 72% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.87684729064 58% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.82512315271 166% => OK
Positive topic words: 6.0 6.46551724138 93% => OK
Negative topic words: 4.0 5.36822660099 75% => OK
Neutral topic words: 7.0 2.82389162562 248% => OK
Total topic words: 17.0 14.657635468 116% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.