The following appeared in a memo from the director of a large group of hospitals.
"In a controlled laboratory study of liquid hand soaps, a concentrated solution of extra strength UltraClean hand soap produced a 40 percent greater reduction in harmful bacteria than did the liquid hand soaps currently used in our hospitals. During our recent test of regular- strength UltraClean with doctors, nurses, and visitors our hospital in Worktown, the hospital reported significantly fewer cases of patient infection (20 percent reduction) than did any of the other hospitals in our group. The explanation for the 20 percent reduction in patient infections is the use of UltraClean soap.”
The director of a large group of hospital maintains that all the hospital within their system should substitute UltraClean for a present hand-washing product so as to prevent serious patient infections. However, this argument rests on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.
The director states that the study shows that UltraClean can produce 40 percent greater reduction in the bacteria population than the liquid hand soaps currently used in the hospital. An assumption here is that the study is made by professional experts at bacteria study and the experts did not make any fabricated data to make any money from the corporation of UltraClean. Furthermore, we do not obtain the exact total of the number of reduction in the bacteria population. It is possible that there were two people reductions after using the current hand-washing product and there were 3 people reductions after using UltraClean, which are both figures well below the industry average.
Even if the number of reduction in bacteria population is prominent, it does not mean that the group of hospitals should replace all the hand-washing product. Maybe the cost of the substitution will lead to a considerable burden for the individual hospital. The author seems to assume that all the hospitals inside the system are wealthy. Even if all the other hospitals are rich, the assumption that patients are infected by the bacteria via physical interaction may be erroneous. If those infected patients emerge the syndromes that only popular in the bacteria which only infect people via fresh air, then the replacement of hand-washing product may not useful.
The author also assumes that the subsequent test in Workby can be analogous to other left hospitals. Nevertheless, it is possible that the Workby has the fewest patients and most medical staff than any other hospital. So patients in Workby got too much care to get any infection. In contrast, other hospitals may have an unbalanced ratio of patients to medical staff; thus, even all the hand-washing products are replaced by UltraClean, the infection ratio may not drop down efficiently.
The director now wants to supply UltraClean at all hand-washing station throughout their hospital system. Nonetheless, it is also likely that the number of infection would not subside, because of a filthy hospital environment. Or worse, the number of infection will increase, due to the wrong awareness of considering that the latest hand-washing product would protect them no matter what thing happened.
In conclusion, the director has to explain the above assumptions to make his arguments more convincing.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/following-appeared…
--------------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 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: 426 350
No. of Characters: 2208 1500
No. of Different Words: 212 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.543 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.183 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.869 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 164 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 129 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 100 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 66 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.421 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.066 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.684 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.322 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.594 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.097 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 159, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...lean for a present hand-washing product so as to prevent serious patient infections. How...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, furthermore, however, if, may, nevertheless, nonetheless, so, then, therefore, thus, well, as to, in conclusion, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 55.5748502994 92% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2263.0 2260.96107784 100% => OK
No of words: 426.0 441.139720559 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.31220657277 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54310108192 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9641939192 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 214.0 204.123752495 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.50234741784 0.468620217663 107% => OK
syllable_count: 695.7 705.55239521 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.0107177686 57.8364921388 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.105263158 119.503703932 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4210526316 23.324526521 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.84210526316 5.70786347227 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.122492159173 0.218282227539 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0405368972084 0.0743258471296 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0547531331524 0.0701772020484 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0746425113714 0.128457276422 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0528442984939 0.0628817314937 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 14.3799401198 103% => OK
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: 13.81 12.5979740519 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.43 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 98.500998004 102% => 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: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.