The following appeared in a letter from the owner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment complex to its manager.
"One month ago, all the showerheads in the first three buildings of the Sunnyside Towers complex were modified to restrict maximum water flow to one-third of what it used to be. 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. I predict that modifying showerheads to restrict water flow throughout all twelve buildings in the Sunnyside Towers complex will increase our profits even more dramatically."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the prediction 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 prediction.
The owner of the Sunnyside Towers says that it can dramatically increase its profits by manipulating the showerheads of its customers to reduce water usage to 1/3. The owner assumes that reducing water usage in 3 of the buildings, though no report of water usage was made available, will increase savings. Based on this assumption, the author assumes that even more saving would be made by replacing the showerheads of all 12 other apartment buildings. However, before this argument is taken for granted and action is taken, several questions need to be answered.
First, it is important if the changes made to peoples’ apartments can be countered by some other change. It is important to ask if people who have had their showerheads replaced will replace them with heads that use the same amount or more water as the old head. Also, it is possible that even if those heads are not repalacable, that people can just take longer showers in order to compensate for the lesser amount of water flowing. In either case, the company can be wasting even more money by paying for more water usage and also wasted money by buying new showerheads. The author seems to take for granted the logic behind reducing water usage equals less money spent and more money saved without even checking for a report to see if water usage has actually decreased, however he or she fails to consider alternatives that could counter the proposed changes.
In addition, the author does not consider alternative ways water could be used. It is true that reducing water usage in the showers can increase profits, however there is a myriad of other ways water bills can run high. For example, do some residants have leaky toilets which waste water all day and night? Since they would leak so assidioulsy, even leaking a few milileters a second could run up the water bill high at the end of the month. This would make changing the showerheads an inefficient way to reduce water usage and fixing leaky toilets a better alternative. Futhermore, has an underground water pipe has bursted causing water to leak out into the ground which would waste gallons of water a month? This is something that could explain the complaints of low water pressure that some residents complain about and how the company could save profits. Thus, it is important to do some diagnostics and inspections to see if water is wasted in other ways and address those damages. Again, the author should take into consideration water readings to see trends in water usage that could indicate more wasted water.
Finally, the author assumes that applying this change in all other buildings will cause even more savings. Though this is a logical assertion, the author again must ask if changes in the few buildings would be as effective as doing so in all other ones. It is possible that people in other buildings take more baths instead which means that replacing the showerheads would do nothing but waste even more money for the owners and do nothing to reduce those residents’ water usage. Also, it is possible that people in those other buildings take very brief showers which will mean that there will be no significant increase in profits that the owner hopes for.
In conclusion, there are many different factors that the author of this proposal has not considered and therefore there are many different questions which must be answered before any expensive and time consuming action is taken.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- not OK. need to argue:
ept for a few complaints about low water pressure, no problems with showers have been reported since the adjustment.
argument 3 -- OK, but not exactly
----------------
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/following-appeared…
---------------------
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: 23 15
No. of Words: 588 350
No. of Characters: 2801 1500
No. of Different Words: 246 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.924 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.764 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.412 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 175 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 129 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 84 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 57 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.565 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.856 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.696 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.349 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.536 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.138 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 26, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'many'.
Suggestion: many
... hopes for. In conclusion, there are many different factors that the author of this proposa...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 125, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'many'.
Suggestion: many
... not considered and therefore there are many different questions which must be answered before...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, first, however, if, second, so, therefore, thus, for example, in addition, in conclusion, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 27.0 12.9520958084 208% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 24.0 13.6137724551 176% => OK
Pronoun: 44.0 28.8173652695 153% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 16.3942115768 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2874.0 2260.96107784 127% => OK
No of words: 587.0 441.139720559 133% => OK
Chars per words: 4.89608177172 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.9222030514 4.56307096286 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52850848862 2.78398813304 91% => OK
Unique words: 257.0 204.123752495 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.437819420784 0.468620217663 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 907.2 705.55239521 129% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 4.96107784431 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.5710831364 57.8364921388 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.956521739 119.503703932 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5217391304 23.324526521 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.65217391304 5.70786347227 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.123888805039 0.218282227539 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0465769190673 0.0743258471296 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0436299993588 0.0701772020484 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0730072408251 0.128457276422 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0502208147064 0.0628817314937 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 14.3799401198 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 48.3550499002 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.44 12.5979740519 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.78 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 98.500998004 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.