The following appeared in a memo from a budget planner for the city of Grandview. "It is time for the city of Grandview to stop funding the Grandview Symphony Orchestra. It is true that the symphony struggled financially for many years, but last year private contributions to the symphony increased by 200 percent and attendance at the symphony's concerts-in-the-park series doubled. In addition, the symphony has just announced an increase in ticket prices for next year. For these reasons, we recommend that the city eliminate funding for the Grandview Symphony Orchestra from next year's budget. We predict that the symphony will flourish in the years to come even without funding from the city." Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The extent to which the government should fund for the Grandview Symphony Orchestra has been complicated in its implication. The memo from a budget planner for the city of Grandview recommends that the city eliminate funding for the Grandview Symphony Orchestra from next year's budget, since they predict that symphony will flourish even without funding from the city. To buttress the argument, the author cites the following evidences: first, private contribution from last year increased by 200 percent; second attendance doubled; last, symphony has just announced an increase in ticket prices for next year. While it might be true that symphony is capable of self-funding, we are not able to fully evaluate the predicted result from this recommendation due to some unanswered questions.
To begin with, the question requiring more evidences is that whether private contribution provides enough funding for the symphony to survive and whether it would continue to do so. If private contributions have been low over several years, then even they increased by 200 percent last year, they might still not be enough to support the whole operation of symphony. To better evaluate the recommendation, the author ought to provide more detailed information about specific donations from private funding over past many years. In addition, the question that whether condition in last year is atypical needs to be addressed. Moreover, the author fails to offer some information about the attendance at symphony's concerts-in-the-park series. If this is just a free activity to publicize symphony and attract the public, then citizens may be willing to join because of curiosity and free of charge. However, some probably will lose interest in it or do not want to pay for such performances. in this case, attendance from this particular concert cannot provide full information and meaningful support to their recommendation. If they no longer hold such events in the future, the attendance would not increase greatly.
Moreover, the author unfairly assumes that increase in ticket prices for next year would guaranteed the self-support of symphony, thereby eliminating city funding. This change might make sense if the new price is still affordable for most of previous audiences. Nonetheless, we should not neglect the potential negative influence due to price increase. In all likelihood, when prices increase too much, most individuals might find it not worthy to appreciate symphony any more. It is natural that demands for symphony would decrease when its price increases, in that enhancing prices may crowd out those whose reservation cost is relatively lower. Therefore, no one can ensure that symphony is able to gather much money from audiences after price increase.
Last but not least, the author unfairly assumes that Grandview Symphony Orchestra will flourish in the years without funding from the city. As we mentioned above, there is no guarantee that funding from private contribution and increased price are enough to support the symphony. Even though funding increases greatly in the next year, the author should also address that whether it is enough to compensate the cost. If government support compose of largest portion of symphony, then removal of its funding would definitely cause symphony in trouble. What’s more, it is likely that costs, including operation costs and labor costs, can increase next year. Hence, even though symphony might benefit from increasing audiences or increasing admission fees, costs may even exceed revenues. In conclusion, without answering the question about impacts for all the potential changes occurring in the future, the conclusion in the memo is problematic.
To sum up, as it stands, the recommendation is replied on evidences with considerable unanswered questions. To better decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result, the author ought to answer the questions as follows: first, whether private contribution and increased attendance are able to support symphony next year; second, whether enhancing prices can generate additional profits; finally, whether symphony can fully support itself without government intervention.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 5.0 out of 6
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 27 15
No. of Words: 651 350
No. of Characters: 3482 1500
No. of Different Words: 277 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 5.051 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.349 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.765 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 275 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 222 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 153 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 99 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.111 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.879 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.778 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.308 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.475 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.084 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 790, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...dation due to some unanswered questions. To begin with, the question requiring ...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 993, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: In
... not want to pay for such performances. in this case, attendance from this particu...
^^
Line 3, column 1219, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e attendance would not increase greatly. Moreover, the author unfairly assumes th...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 90, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'would' requires the base form of the verb: 'guarantee'
Suggestion: guarantee
...se in ticket prices for next year would guaranteed the self-support of symphony, thereby e...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 448, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'of the largest'.
Suggestion: of the largest
...the cost. If government support compose of largest portion of symphony, then removal of it...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 949, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e conclusion in the memo is problematic. To sum up, as it stands, the recommendat...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, hence, however, if, may, moreover, nonetheless, second, so, still, then, therefore, while, in addition, in conclusion, to begin with, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 26.0 12.9520958084 201% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 28.8173652695 135% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 85.0 55.5748502994 153% => OK
Nominalization: 33.0 16.3942115768 201% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3603.0 2260.96107784 159% => OK
No of words: 650.0 441.139720559 147% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.54307692308 5.12650576532 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.04926703274 4.56307096286 111% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95775422562 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 296.0 204.123752495 145% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.455384615385 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 1090.8 705.55239521 155% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.76447105788 160% => OK
Subordination: 11.0 2.70958083832 406% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 11.0 4.22255489022 261% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 81.1397411877 57.8364921388 140% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.12 119.503703932 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.0 23.324526521 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.8 5.70786347227 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 8.20758483034 195% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.324279578064 0.218282227539 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0978937803334 0.0743258471296 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.112942115134 0.0701772020484 161% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.201297608647 0.128457276422 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.157992860488 0.0628817314937 251% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.7 14.3799401198 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.63 48.3550499002 76% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.197005988 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.15 12.5979740519 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.67 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 154.0 98.500998004 156% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
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.