The following appeared in a memo to the board of the Grandview Symphony.
"The city of Grandview has provided annual funding for the Grandview Symphony since the symphony's inception ten years ago. Last year the symphony hired an internationally known conductor, who has been able to attract high-profile guest musicians to perform with the symphony. Since then, private contributions to the symphony have doubled and attendance at the symphony's concerts-in-the-park series has reached new highs. Now that the Grandview Symphony is an established success, it can raise ticket prices. Increased revenue from larger audiences and higher ticket prices will enable the symphony to succeed without funding from the city government."
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.
With last year's positive results regarding performances as a premise for assumption, Grandview Symphony has arrived to the conclusion that if they raise the prices of the tickets, they will be on the road to success without the support of city funds. However, before it is established that success will be obtained from increasing the ticket prices, there needs to be an analyzation of two factors associated with this proposal.
Firstly, it is supposed that people will continue to purchase tickets as the prices raise. They would need to obtain some sort of proof that there would be an increase in or atleast a consistency of the same number of audience despite the price increase for the tickets.Who is to say that the people who usually come to see events will continue to come after the price rises. They may think that the plays were only worth the original price and therefore as the price increased, the value of the event mitigated from their perception. Accordingly, assuming that the expenses remain relatively concrete proportionally, the profit might display an adverse affect than the one they had expected and actually lower their revenue. Even if it is stable, then there might be a decrease in the number of people contributing to the audience. So in order for the proposal in their conclusion to be executed, they need to assess and analyze this issue.
Secondly, it is assumed that just because there was a significant increase in the attendance for the symphonies last year, and that it was continuous, that it will continue this year as well. In order for this to hold merit, there needs to be some sort of evidence that the circumstances and environment from the previous year is almost exactly the same as this such as which months consisted of the previous year in which the attendance spiked and which months consist of the current year where the spike is ongoing. The spike in last year may have been initiated in December around Christmas and continued past New Year's Day. First of all this is a short amount of time to determine any statistics and base any future plans on. Second of all, even if it was an extended amount of time, say a span of eleven months, then are the situations the same? Was there a collection of musicians that appeared last year that will definetely appear again this year? Are those musicians as popular? In a span of eleven months, has their been any other entertainment developments that will alter people's pathways from this symphony? In order to proceed with the stated assumption, they need to aver that the previous year has the same notions as the current year.
In order for the supposition dictated by the concluders to hold merit, they need to locate various evidence to build the premise of their decision. If they are able to provide sufficient proof for the success mentioned, then it will be possibile to further evaluate the situation and determine whether the price change will lead to success or failure.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 513 350
No. of Characters: 2425 1500
No. of Different Words: 232 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.759 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.727 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.529 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 159 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 123 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 85 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 47 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 27 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.561 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.737 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.294 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.481 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.071 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 271, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Who
...pite the price increase for the tickets.Who is to say that the people who usually c...
^^^
Line 5, column 635, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...oncrete proportionally, the profit might display an adverse affect than the one t...
^^
Line 13, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... same notions as the current year. In order for the supposition dictated by t...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, actually, but, first, firstly, however, if, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, well, sort of, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.9520958084 147% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 21.0 13.6137724551 154% => OK
Pronoun: 46.0 28.8173652695 160% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 70.0 55.5748502994 126% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2481.0 2260.96107784 110% => OK
No of words: 512.0 441.139720559 116% => OK
Chars per words: 4.845703125 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.75682846001 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61180577157 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 236.0 204.123752495 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.4609375 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 771.3 705.55239521 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 70.4251827913 57.8364921388 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.578947368 119.503703932 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.9473684211 23.324526521 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.78947368421 5.70786347227 136% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 6.88822355289 15% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.164331102652 0.218282227539 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.053176994879 0.0743258471296 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0620266870019 0.0701772020484 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0950927050013 0.128457276422 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0669660485204 0.0628817314937 106% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 14.3799401198 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 48.3550499002 111% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.15 12.5979740519 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.63 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 98.500998004 122% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.