This letter is proposing to build a new dormitory in the university to release the increasing pressure of student’s accommodation. And it is claimed that this practice will attract prospective students to apply for Buckingham. However, there are some major points the author fails to substantiate to convince the reader that the short dormitory supply is true, and by establishing a new dormitory will eventually help mitigate the gap between short supply and increasing demand. Here lists three major aspects where the letter lacks further illustration.
To begin with, the letter mentioned the rental fee for apartment has increased, which made it difficult for students to afford. From this statement, what we can speculate is that price is getting high to rent an apartment, but how much does it increased compared to the original level is not mentioned. Meanwhile, whether students are capable to tolerate the increase is not discussed either. If the level is still beneath what students are able to afford, then the increasing housing needs may not seem a serious problem for the university. Moreover, the letter assumes that a new dormitory building will definitely attract more student to get enrolled at Buckingham. This point lacks enough evidence to support as well. Will the new dormitory charge more than the apartment off-campus? We don’t know. Will more students enrolled in Buckingham only because they offer a less dormitory charge? We don’t know.
Secondly, there is no enough evidence to testify that the requirement for dormitory is in shortage. A stretching and inadequate supply of dormitory is based on the fact that the university’s enrollment is augmenting. And this trend will likely continue to reach double of the current level. Giving the current growing number of enrollment, we cannot simply assume that the demand for university dormitory will increase accordingly. There are numbers of students who would choose to live at home or off-campus due to various reasons. Unless a survey is conducted to check the student’s living preferences, can we conclude that the increasing accommodation demand is valid.
Last but not the least, there is no demonstration in this letter to persuade us that building a new dormitory will solve the problem of housing constraint in the university. Let us assume that the demand is valid, and the current dormitories are indeed in shortage. Does it mean that the university must build a new apartment building to meet this need? Is there other ways to release the tense? We cannot find such answers in this letter. Constructing a new building will surely help to provide more housing space, but definitely cost a big deal. If the university could transform the existing single rooms into double rooms, this would reach a same goal at a much lower cost, why wouldn’t the university consider another option?
In summary, this proposal in this letter seems to release the current constraint the university is facing. However whether building a new dormitory will attract more enrollment for Buckingham, and whether it is worthy to invest in a new dormitory , we need more discussion to rule out other possibilities to prove itself to be valid. Thus , we need more consideration before university dean to make such a decision.
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 30 15
No. of Words: 538 350
No. of Characters: 2692 1500
No. of Different Words: 249 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.816 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.004 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.758 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 201 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 152 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 111 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 76 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.933 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.862 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.467 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.27 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.433 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.103 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 231, Rule ID: MUCH_COUNTABLE[1]
Message: Use 'many' with countable nouns.
Suggestion: many
...ting high to rent an apartment, but how much does it increased compared to the origi...
^^^^
Line 5, column 107, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...nt constraint the university is facing. However whether building a new dormitory will a...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 246, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...t is worthy to invest in a new dormitory , we need more discussion to rule out oth...
^^
Line 5, column 338, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...lities to prove itself to be valid. Thus , we need more consideration before unive...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, but, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, still, then, thus, well, while, in short, in summary, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.9520958084 170% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 28.8173652695 135% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2786.0 2260.96107784 123% => OK
No of words: 535.0 441.139720559 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.20747663551 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.80937282943 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94441969552 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 258.0 204.123752495 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.482242990654 0.468620217663 103% => OK
syllable_count: 870.3 705.55239521 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 4.96107784431 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 7.0 1.67365269461 418% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 30.0 19.7664670659 152% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 54.4314145406 57.8364921388 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 92.8666666667 119.503703932 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.8333333333 23.324526521 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.5 5.70786347227 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.67664670659 214% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.205180244419 0.218282227539 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0597690164546 0.0743258471296 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0496785876275 0.0701772020484 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.127581133244 0.128457276422 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0271779798269 0.0628817314937 43% => 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: 12.0 14.3799401198 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.3550499002 112% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.64 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.9 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 116.0 98.500998004 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.