The reading passage states that on the basis of new test, it is concluded that a concentrated Ultraclean solution would increase salinity to 40 percent and recommends it for the usage in hand-washing stations throughout hospital. Nonetheless, the reasons and ideas presented in the argument are not convincing and rest on unsubstantiated foundation and in what follows the most discernible controversies are drawn.
First, the passage asserts that, based on reports, during a subsequent test of UltraClean at a hospital, large number of patient infection have been removed. However, the argument does not mention that how the test was conducted. Indeed, the reliability of the test condition would completely affect the conclusion and result. In this regard, the environment of the hospital should be discussed, during or before test program. Maybe, the test was accomplished in cold environment and as everyone are fully aware of, the activity of bacteria in this condition decreases. Hence, the results of the test are unreliable since test condition was not discussed.
Second, the article claims that concentrated solution of UltraClean produces 40 percent more protection for patient in hospital. Nevertheless, the argument should shed the light on others potential changes too. Actually, maybe some other factors was proscribed to prevent more infection. Commonly, the dean of the hospital usually wants to have the most hygiene environment. Monthly, they recruit a group of doctor for long-term solution, specifically infection matter. Maybe, non-infectious cream and medicine, yield this results. Therefore, the function of other important factors should be considered and they may affect the increment of percentage change.
Third, the argument says that, the results of test in specific hospital in comparison to the others hospital demonstrate that fewer amount infection exist in the hospital which uses UltraClean material as constituent of their soaps. However, some other factors may enhance hospital virus-protection. Indeed, maybe nurses and worker of that specific hospital were obliged to change their nasty clothes daily, or put on gloves and etc. This would also help to have more infection-protection and there is not any correlation with this to UltraClean material.
In conclusion, as the above-mentioned examples have illustrated, the uncertainty about the test environment, validation of results, and consideration of other factors are major defects of this article and should be at least acknowledged by the author. This shows that the article is laid on shallow foundation and therefore the whole argument is rejected, unless, the author make the ambiguousness and uncertainty of the article unblemished.
Essay evaluation report
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/following-appeared…
--------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 414 350
No. of Characters: 2262 1500
No. of Different Words: 204 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.511 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.464 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.07 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 173 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 143 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 104 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 69 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.7 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.282 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.65 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.308 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.532 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.052 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 94, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'others'' or 'other's'?
Suggestion: others'; other's
... specific hospital in comparison to the others hospital demonstrate that fewer amount ...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 426, Rule ID: AND_ETC[1]
Message: Use simply 'etc.'.
Suggestion: etc.
...r nasty clothes daily, or put on gloves and etc. This would also help to have more infec...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, first, hence, however, if, may, nevertheless, nonetheless, second, so, therefore, third, at least, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 11.1786427146 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 28.8173652695 76% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 55.5748502994 99% => OK
Nominalization: 32.0 16.3942115768 195% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2335.0 2260.96107784 103% => OK
No of words: 414.0 441.139720559 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.64009661836 5.12650576532 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.51076378781 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.1622822727 2.78398813304 114% => OK
Unique words: 216.0 204.123752495 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.521739130435 0.468620217663 111% => OK
syllable_count: 709.2 705.55239521 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 17.0 8.76447105788 194% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 56.5790438998 57.8364921388 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.19047619 119.503703932 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7142857143 23.324526521 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.09523809524 5.70786347227 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
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: 0.0821393801451 0.218282227539 38% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0240025180471 0.0743258471296 32% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0466944522407 0.0701772020484 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0507242133858 0.128457276422 39% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.043127258132 0.0628817314937 69% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 14.3799401198 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 48.3550499002 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.43 12.5979740519 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.31 8.32208582834 112% => OK
difficult_words: 124.0 98.500998004 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.