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 t

Essay topics:

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 claims that it would be more lucrative to restrict the water flow to one-third of what it used to be for all twelve buildings of the Sunnyside towers complex, and presents several reasons to uphold his/her claim. However, the letter is rife with holes and assumptions and such mistakes should be eliminated in order for the owner to bolster his/her claim with warranted proofs. The flaws in the letter would be discussed with further details below.
First of all, the author of the letter maintains that there were few complaints about the low water pressure, so it would be okay to pursue the same alteration through other buildings. However, having few complaints doesn't necessarily indicate that the other residents who did not complain are satisfied with it. They simply could have moved out of the Sunnyside tower or are preparing to move out, without any complaints. Furthermore, the modification had been made for only a month, and there is a possibility that maybe that one month was from July to August, and the majority of the residents were out travelling or enjoying their vacation with other families who live elsewhere. If this is the case, there would not have been enough residents to experience the change and complain about it.
In addition, the owner of the complex assumes that restricting the water flow would always lead to residents using less amount of water. However, the residents might have been using the water for a longer duration than before because of the low water pressure. Due to this, the overall amount of water used might not have changed since the alteration, or worse, more water could have been used. He/she would have to provide actual readings of water usage in order to use this evidence to uphold his/her claim.
Lastly, the author of the letter believes that the first three buildings are representative enough of the other nine buildings. This of course is a clear flaw, because we cannot be certain that the other nine buildings' water usage pattern would turn out to be the same as the first three buildings. Even if the residents of the first three buildings were okay with the modification of the water pressure, this does not indicate that the residents of the other nine buildings would also be satisfied. Maybe after the alteration is complete throughout all twelve buildings, majority of the residents could be complaining about the low water pressure which can lead to them moving out of the complex or causing any bad happenings.
To sum up, even though the letter seems plausible, through thorough investigation and reading it from diverse perspectives, it is confirmed that the claim of the owner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment complex is unwarranted. In order for him/her to bolster the claim, he/she would have to eliminate the flaws of lack of information in his/her evidences and using unrepresentative data.

Average: 7.8 (2 votes)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:


Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 216, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ildings. However, having few complaints doesnt necessarily indicate that the other res...

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, however, if, lastly, may, so, third, in addition, of course, first of all, to sum up

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 28.8173652695 139% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 72.0 55.5748502994 130% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2424.0 2260.96107784 107% => OK
No of words: 488.0 441.139720559 111% => OK
Chars per words: 4.96721311475 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70007681154 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61725816681 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 204.123752495 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.434426229508 0.468620217663 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 751.5 705.55239521 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.8919818255 57.8364921388 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.666666667 119.503703932 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.1111111111 23.324526521 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.11111111111 5.70786347227 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => 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: 0.257600549467 0.218282227539 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0868134543072 0.0743258471296 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.079281694502 0.0701772020484 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.149744842481 0.128457276422 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0406539101269 0.0628817314937 65% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 14.3799401198 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 48.3550499002 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 12.197005988 103% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.95 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 98.500998004 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 5 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 6 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 496 350
No. of Characters: 2368 1500
No. of Different Words: 208 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.719 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.774 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.541 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 145 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 110 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 83 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 60 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 27.556 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.7 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.611 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.378 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.378 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.201 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5