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 a letter from the owner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment complex, it is predicted that the adjustment of showerheads in all the twelve buildings at Sunnyside Towers complex will increase the profit margin of Sunnyside Corporation. This conclusion was drawn based on the fact that modifying showers will lead to the modification of water flow which in turn will reduce the fees the Corporation pays for water bills monthly. However, this recommendation needs to be subjected to three questions before it can be properly evaluated.
Firstly, is it possible that the reduction in water pressure in showerheads would lead to less patronage of the complex from customers? Maybe one of the reasons the Sunnyside complex is preferred by their customers is there maximum water flow. Therefore, if that is reduced to one-third of its original value, will customers still want to live in the complex? If the number of people who want to leave within the complex reduces would that not affect the profits of the corporation? The author of the letter provides no evidence that states otherwise, hence, if this stands true, then the conclusion drawn by the author is significantly flawed.
Furthermore, is it possible that the water usage before and after the adjustment are the same? The author prematurely assumes that a reduction in water flow in showerheads will automatically result in a lower usage of water. It is possible that some people might switch to alternative water sources that will provide them with the right amount of pressure. For instance, some people might decide to switch the use of taps for the provision of water for their bathing. Since the water pressure in the taps are not reduced, will it not still result in the same quantity of water that will result in the same value of water bills for the Sunnyside Corporation? Without further information about how people would be deterred from using alternative sources of water to fulfill their needs, it is difficult to evaluate the reasoning behind the conclusion of the author.
Finally, is it possible that the corporation has to pay the same amount of money regardless of the volume they use? In some places, the water bill value is dependent on the type of property being considered rather than the usage of water in that property. Hence, if that is the case in this scenario, then the reduction in water pressure and usage in the complex would be inconsequential to the cost incurred by the corporation in the payment of water bills. Hence, the author needs to provide context to the charging system being utilized in the state or county the Sunnyside Towers complex is situated. Without this, it is difficult to examine the effect that the reduction in water use will have on the profits of the corporation. Hence rendering his conclusion questionable.
As it stands, the argument of the author is considerably flawed. There are some pertinent questions about the assumptions on which his conclusion is based. Therefore, further evaluation and evidence needs to be provided to answer these questions, without such move, his argument cannot be properly evaluated.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 8 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 1 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 521 350
No. of Characters: 2565 1500
No. of Different Words: 205 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.778 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.923 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.688 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 179 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 133 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 98 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 69 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.652 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.811 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.565 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.324 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.379 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.078 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 2 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 735, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...have on the profits of the corporation. Hence rendering his conclusion questionable. ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, firstly, furthermore, hence, however, if, may, so, still, then, therefore, third, as to, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.6327345309 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 28.8173652695 139% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 86.0 55.5748502994 155% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 16.3942115768 146% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2620.0 2260.96107784 116% => OK
No of words: 521.0 441.139720559 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.02879078695 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.77759609229 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77116770891 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 216.0 204.123752495 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.414587332054 0.468620217663 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 829.8 705.55239521 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.0461640965 57.8364921388 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.913043478 119.503703932 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.652173913 23.324526521 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.08695652174 5.70786347227 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => 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: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.253768003854 0.218282227539 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0757129845552 0.0743258471296 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.102510345927 0.0701772020484 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.15242232302 0.128457276422 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.112074431336 0.0628817314937 178% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 14.3799401198 95% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.19 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.0 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 98.500998004 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.