The following appeared in a letter from the owner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment building to its manager.
"One month ago, all the showerheads on the first five floors of Sunnyside Towers were modified to restrict the water flow to approximately one-third of its original flow. Although actual readings of water usage before and after the adjustment are not yet available, the change will obviously result in a considerable savings for Sunnyside Corporation, since the corporation must pay for water each month. Except for a few complaints about low water pressure, no problems with showers have been reported since the adjustment. Clearly, restricting water flow throughout all the twenty floors of Sunnyside Towers will increase our profits further."
In the assertionmade by the owner of the Sunnyside Towers, there will be increase in profits withlower waste of water, since the showers were altered to limit water passage. Tomake such argument, the author uses the logic of having fewer complaints aboutwater and shower facilities in the building. To substansiate, the conclusionabove author must be able to answer following three questions.
Firstly, how canauthor say there are equal or greater number of people living in the apartmentbefore and after the shower repairment? Isn’t it possible to have fewer peoplestaying in the apartment due to the shower facilities which is resulting in fewercomplaints? It is possible that people are having negative talks about theapartment, thus they are not agreeing to stay there due to poor utilities inthe building. It might also be possible that people are making their mind to changethe place and are not complaining while they are staying in the building. They maybe planning to silently change the apartment leaving no negativity back. If anyof the above case is true, the profit for the apartment is not going to raise resultingin weakening the argument made by the author.
Further, the authorblindly assumes increase in profits from using fewer water in the building withouthaving proper statistic about the water used before and after shower adjustment.There is a possibility that the new shower is in fact increasing the water consumptionin the apartment building. Before the shower replacement, there might be fewerwater using showers but the repairment could have in fact increased the water usageamong people with more operating shower and utility consumption options. Thusresulting in more consumption of water and less profit due to water saving. If abovecontentation is true, the author reasoning does not hold water.
Lastly, Isn’tit possible that people staying in the first five floors were working professionalwho stay outside of the building more often? And people e in the other twentyfloors of the building are the ones who workfrom home? In that case, people in the first five floor will use less amount ofwater even without changing the shower. Perhaps, the people who stay in the othertwenty floors are the ones who consume water at great quantity. Even if theshower head are changed they may use it for longer time resulting in higher usageof water and decrease in expected profits. If above case is true, the assertionby the author is flawed.The argument inthe prompt is not convincing with lots of warrant assumptions and flawedevidences. If the author wants to have a concrete contentation, above questionsshould be answered and fixed.
luate the recommendation.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 9 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 37 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 601 350
No. of Characters: 3098 1500
No. of Different Words: 288 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.951 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.155 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.937 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 221 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 161 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 124 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 83 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 27.318 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 14.195 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.545 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.308 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.308 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.106 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 393, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Firstly
...ble to answer following three questions.Firstly, how canauthor say there are equal or g...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 741, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...ive talks about theapartment, thus they are not agreeing to stay there due to poor utilities int...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 1172, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Further
...akening the argument made by the author.Further, the authorblindly assumes increase in ...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 1238, Rule ID: FEWER_UNCOUNTABLE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'less water'?
Suggestion: less water
... assumes increase in profits from using fewer water in the building withouthaving proper st...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 1353, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: There
...used before and after shower adjustment.There is a possibility that the new shower is...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 1824, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Lastly
...he author reasoning does not hold water.Lastly, Isn’tit possible that people staying i...
^^^^^^
Line 1, column 2005, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nd people e in the other twentyfloors of the building are the ones who workfrom h...
^^
Line 1, column 2460, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...e, the assertionby the author is flawed.The argument inthe prompt is not convincing...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, lastly, may, so, third, thus, while, except for, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 32.0 19.6327345309 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 28.8173652695 66% => OK
Preposition: 87.0 55.5748502994 157% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 16.3942115768 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3178.0 2260.96107784 141% => OK
No of words: 590.0 441.139720559 134% => OK
Chars per words: 5.38644067797 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.92848004997 4.56307096286 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.29739392017 2.78398813304 118% => OK
Unique words: 286.0 204.123752495 140% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.484745762712 0.468620217663 103% => OK
syllable_count: 989.1 705.55239521 140% => 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: 9.0 2.70958083832 332% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.22255489022 213% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 90.6317701945 57.8364921388 157% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.454545455 119.503703932 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.8181818182 23.324526521 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.95454545455 5.70786347227 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 5.15768463074 58% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 8.0 5.25449101796 152% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.29469277779 0.218282227539 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0777199929339 0.0743258471296 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.1405090323 0.0701772020484 200% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.199022182838 0.128457276422 155% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.197505518503 0.0628817314937 314% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.4 14.3799401198 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.63 48.3550499002 76% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.197005988 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.28 12.5979740519 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.83 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 146.0 98.500998004 148% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum four paragraphs wanted.
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.