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.
While it may be true that modifying showerheads to restrict water flow throughout all twelve buildings in the Sunnyside Towers complex will increase profits even more dramatically. This argument does not make any cogent case for modifying Showerheads. It is easy to understand why modifying Showerheads to restrict water flow throughout all twelve buildings in the Sunnyside Towers complex will increase profits even more dramatically. But, the argument is rife with holes and assumption, and thus, not strong enough to support author's recommendation. I think there may be some other factors which may make author's argument to be invalid. Hence the argument is incomplete.
Initially, the here author readily assumes that 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. This is merely an assumption without solid ground. Since, the author mention only that, that first three buildings of the Sunnyside Towers complex were modified to restrict maximum water flow to one third of what it used and no other figure. It is probable that one third is not a noticeable change without giving more information on it. Hence the argument would have been more convincing if it explicitly stated exact statitical information on water flow.
Moreover, the argument here states that although actual reading of water usage before and after the adjustment are not yet available, the change will obviously result in a considerable savings for Sunnyside corporation and the author's understanding is assumption is that because the corporation must pay for water each month.This again is the weak and unsupported claim as it does not demonstrate any correlation between author's conclusion and the change will obviously result in a considerable savings for Sunnyside corporation.
Further, author needs to provide strong evidence that will support author's claim that change will obviously result in a considerable savings. However, author does not provide any statistical information on actual reading of water usage before and after the adjustment which ultimately weakens the author's argument. If the argument had provided evidence that change will obviously result in a considerable savings for Sunnyside corporation, then it would have been a lot more convincing to the reader.
Additionally, the author states that except for a few month about low water pressure, no problems with shower have been reported since the adjustment. this groundless the author's claim. As it may possible that many people who lives in that buildings are quite introvert in nature excepting few and decided not to complain or it may equally possible that they temporary residents of that buildings so they avoided complaining. any of these scenarios, if true would serve to weaken the author's conclusion and in turn , undermine the author's claim.
Lastly, the author states that modifying shower heads to restrict water flow throughout all twelve buildings in the Sunnyside towers complex will increase profits even more dramatically. however, careful scrutiny of the evidence reveals that it provides little credible support for the author's claim. For eg, it my possible that infrastructure of remaining nine buildings are different from that three building and they may face more problems compared to other buildings. However, author provide evidence of complains only of one month which is probably very negligible or meaningless ot it may equally possible that complains may increases as time progresses. Without convincing evidence to author's conclusion, the reader is left with the impression that claim made by author are more of a wishful thinking rather than substantative evidence.
In conclusion, the author's argument is unpersuasive. Additionally, by considering the discussion above it can be seen that reason mentioned by the author are not enough to support his suggestion. The argument loses weight because it has no explanation for the discussion given above.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 25 15
No. of Words: 637 350
No. of Characters: 3384 1500
No. of Different Words: 247 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 5.024 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.312 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.819 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 261 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 205 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 159 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 101 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.48 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 16.317 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.68 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.335 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.586 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.095 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 7 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “While” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
While it may be true that modifying showerhea...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 640, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...ay make authors argument to be invalid. Hence the argument is incomplete. Ini...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 564, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
... without giving more information on it. Hence the argument would have been more convi...
^^^^^
Line 13, column 326, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: This
...rporation must pay for water each month.This again is the weak and unsupported claim...
^^^^
Line 15, column 298, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...adjustment which ultimately weakens the authors argument. If the argument had provided ...
^^^^^^^
Line 21, column 51, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun month seems to be countable; consider using: 'few months'.
Suggestion: few months
...ly, the author states that except for a few month about low water pressure, no problems w...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 21, column 152, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: This
...ave been reported since the adjustment. this groundless the authors claim. As it may...
^^^^
Line 21, column 427, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Any
... buildings so they avoided complaining. any of these scenarios, if true would serve...
^^^
Line 21, column 485, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...rios, if true would serve to weaken the authors conclusion and in turn , undermine the ...
^^^^^^^
Line 21, column 515, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...eaken the authors conclusion and in turn , undermine the authors claim. La...
^^
Line 27, column 31, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
.... Lastly, the author states that modifying shower heads to restrict water...
^^
Line 27, column 189, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: However
...ncrease profits even more dramatically. however, careful scrutiny of the evidence revea...
^^^^^^^
Line 27, column 694, Rule ID: TO_NON_BASE[1]
Message: The verb after "to" should be in the base form: 'author'.
Suggestion: author
...gresses. Without convincing evidence to authors conclusion, the reader is left with the...
^^^^^^^
Line 33, column 20, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ve evidence. In conclusion, the authors argument is unpersuasive. Additionally,...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, however, if, lastly, may, moreover, so, then, third, thus, while, except for, i think, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 12.9520958084 162% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 26.0 13.6137724551 191% => OK
Pronoun: 49.0 28.8173652695 170% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 70.0 55.5748502994 126% => OK
Nominalization: 34.0 16.3942115768 207% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3477.0 2260.96107784 154% => OK
No of words: 636.0 441.139720559 144% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.46698113208 5.12650576532 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.02185627292 4.56307096286 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8956408864 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 255.0 204.123752495 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.400943396226 0.468620217663 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1072.8 705.55239521 152% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 19.7664670659 137% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 93.3980962845 57.8364921388 161% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.777777778 119.503703932 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5555555556 23.324526521 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.40740740741 5.70786347227 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 7.0 5.15768463074 136% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 14.0 5.25449101796 266% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 18.0 6.88822355289 261% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.24424185952 0.218282227539 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0786764158119 0.0743258471296 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.130654161188 0.0701772020484 186% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12809321486 0.128457276422 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.126063516114 0.0628817314937 200% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 14.3799401198 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 48.3550499002 82% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.74 12.5979740519 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.81 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 122.0 98.500998004 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Maximum six 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.