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.
In this article, the author predicts that changing all the showerheads in the Sunside Towers apartment will increase the profits since they can save much water usage. Although his argument seems plausible at first glance, the lack of information and wrong assumptions lead me to question the validity of his argument.
First of all, the author assumes that the effect of changing the showerheads will be the same for all buildings in the Sunnyside Towers complex. However, if the environment of the towers in the complex is different, this may not be true in all cases. For more specific, the water flow could be affected by water pressure and the height of the building. Even though there were no problems with the restriction of maximum water flow in the first three buildings, there could be a critical problem in the other towers that are higher than the first three towers. The taller height of the buildings means that it is more difficult for the water to reach that height. Therefore, some residents may experience not enough water flow when they want to take a shower. To bolster his assertion, the author needs to provide more detailed information about all of the buildings.
Second, the author states that he does not have the actual readings of water usage before and after the adjustment. So all of the arguments in his memo are just guesses based on unchecked assumptions at this time. Nevertheless, the author argues that the change will save the money that pays for water usage. This fact makes his claim unconvincing inevitably. To ensure his claim, the author should show the actual data about water usage of the Sunnyside Towers complex after the change of the showerheads in the first three buildings.
Lastly, the author believes that the change of showerheads will increase their profits ever more dramatically. Generally, when we evaluate the profits of a certain kind of business, we need to consider all of the costs and benefits related to that business. But he does not provide the exact price of the water supply in the region. So we do not convince his claim based on the information that he stated in the memo. For example, if the price of the water is not a significant factor to maintain the complex, the saving of water would not affect the high increase of the profits of the Sunnyside Towers apartment complex.
In conclusion, since this memo has many flaws and wrong predictions, the author's argument is not plausible. To strengthen his argument, the author should provide additional information such as the specifications of the buildings, actual water usage data of the first three buildings, and the price of the water in that regions.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 7 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 2 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 455 350
No. of Characters: 2175 1500
No. of Different Words: 189 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.619 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.78 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.502 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 145 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 100 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 76 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 46 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.667 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.504 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.762 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.353 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.529 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.099 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 586, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'buildings'' or 'building's'?
Suggestion: buildings'; building's
... three towers. The taller height of the buildings means that it is more difficult for the...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 846, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...provide more detailed information about all of the buildings. Second, the author states...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 120, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...age before and after the adjustment. So all of the arguments in his memo are just guesses ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 203, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...n kind of business, we need to consider all of the costs and benefits related to that busi...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 74, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...s many flaws and wrong predictions, the authors argument is not plausible. To strengthe...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, lastly, may, nevertheless, second, so, then, therefore, for example, in conclusion, kind of, such as, first of all, in all cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.6327345309 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 28.8173652695 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 61.0 55.5748502994 110% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2233.0 2260.96107784 99% => OK
No of words: 455.0 441.139720559 103% => OK
Chars per words: 4.90769230769 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.61852021839 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61886922726 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 204.123752495 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.430769230769 0.468620217663 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 675.9 705.55239521 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.8509752104 57.8364921388 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.333333333 119.503703932 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.6666666667 23.324526521 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.28571428571 5.70786347227 128% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => 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: 0.251946266121 0.218282227539 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0795947910042 0.0743258471296 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0872777338468 0.0701772020484 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.142266978413 0.128457276422 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.075724752267 0.0628817314937 120% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 14.3799401198 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 48.3550499002 121% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.2 12.5979740519 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.15 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 98.500998004 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.