The following appeared in a magazine article about planning for retirement.
"Clearview should be a top choice for anyone seeking a place to retire, because it has
spectacular natural beauty and a consistent climate. Another advantage is that housing costs
in Clearview have fallen significantly during the past year, and taxes remain lower than those
in neighboring towns. Moreover, Clearview's mayor promises many new programs to improve
schools, streets, and public services. And best of all, retirees in Clearview can also expect
excellent health care as they grow older, since the number of physicians in the area is far
greater than the national average."
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the
argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument
The mayor of Clearview has shown great concern about the development of Clearview by advertising that the city is a plum for retirement. While the mayor’s intention might be genuine, the argument does not prove this to be the case. The argument, which was based on vague terms, unjustified analogy and contingency of ulterior motive, is vitiated by these blemishes.
To start with, while citing the city’s possession of spectacular beauty and consistent clime, the mayor assumes these features will gain people’s predilection. However, the mayor, who has given ambiguous explication of these feautures, has proved to shady. This is because we do not know the exact ilk of aesthetics he is talking about. Is it sloppy landscape? Or grassy area? Perhaps, he is talking about proximity to rocks and mountains, which might be scary to some senior citizens. Hence, the argument will be greatly ameliorated when the mayor expounds his equivocal terms.
Also, while quoting the decline in housing cost and steady low tax rate, the mayor suggest that everyone would be able to afford living in the city. Again, we do not how significant these costs have declined. It might be from a price of 200,000 dollars to 150,000 dollars, which might still be high for the hoi polloi to afford. Moreover, the tax rate, which has been touted to be lower than that of neighbouring cities might not be the lowest around. Thus, for the argument to be validated, the mayor need to present the rate at which the housing costs has declined and city’s tax rate. With these, more potential residence will be able to determine their capacity of residing in the city.
Lastly, while relying on the availability of myriads of physicians, the mayor implies that this will lead to excellent health care. This might not be the case. The physicians, whom we do not know if they work in Clearview or neighbouring city, might not have any correlation with the fitness of the city’ health system. Besides, the city might not even be in possession of quality facility to aid these physicians. Therefore, without the mayor showing other factors that makes up a great health care system, the advertisement might likely wade people off Clearview.
In conclusion, the mayor of Clearview has shown his altruism towards the growth of Clearview by depicting the city as a great place of retirement for the supererogatory denizens. While he might seem to have great intents, the grounds which he had based his argument all serve to undermine his argument. Thus, without the mayor improving this argument, he might likely thwart the interest of people in Clearview.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 5 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 9 2
No. of Sentences: 24 15
No. of Words: 439 350
No. of Characters: 2118 1500
No. of Different Words: 215 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.577 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.825 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.55 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 136 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 106 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 72 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 49 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.292 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.949 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.708 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.304 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.491 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.117 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 130, Rule ID: AFFORD_VBG[1]
Message: This verb is used with infinitive: 'to live'.
Suggestion: to live
...t that everyone would be able to afford living in the city. Again, we do not how signi...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, hence, however, if, lastly, may, moreover, so, still, therefore, thus, while, in conclusion, talking about, to start with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 28.8173652695 111% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2201.0 2260.96107784 97% => OK
No of words: 439.0 441.139720559 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.01366742597 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.57737117129 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67859660054 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 226.0 204.123752495 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.514806378132 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 654.3 705.55239521 93% => 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: 15.0 8.76447105788 171% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 42.7538172435 57.8364921388 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.7083333333 119.503703932 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.2916666667 23.324526521 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.66666666667 5.70786347227 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.144300567485 0.218282227539 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0444104210725 0.0743258471296 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0440861601409 0.0701772020484 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0866127186022 0.128457276422 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0280680380118 0.0628817314937 45% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 14.3799401198 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 48.3550499002 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.197005988 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.59 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 113.0 98.500998004 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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.