The following appeared in a memo from the director of student housing at Buckingham College.
"To serve the housing needs of our students, Buckingham College should build a number of new dormitories. Buckingham's enrollment is growing and, based on current trends, will double over the next 50 years, thus making existing dormitory space inadequate. Moreover, the average rent for an apartment in our town has risen in recent years. Consequently, students will find it increasingly difficult to afford off-campus housing. Finally, attractive new dormitories would make prospective students more likely to enroll at Buckingham."
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.
The author of the argument cited that Buckingham college should build a number of new dormitories to accommodate students in the near future. Since, the current trends presage that the enrollment will double in next five decades. This conclusion might appear logical and convincing at first glance. However, a more critical analysis of the justification provided by the author has highlighted many queries. Therefore, the premises in there current form are not cogent - they are prevalent with unwarranted assumptions and susceptible for attacks.
To begin with, it is seems sensible to be prepared for future problems. Although it is not reasonable to prescience the future needs based on the current trends. Because the reasons that are attracting the students presently towards Buckingham college might not be the same in future, moreover, the students that are influx might from the same town or near by, they might prefer to be day scholars rather to stay at hostels.
Secondly, the premise that the average rent for apartments in our town has risen. The author here is not cogent about two points, whether the rise is significant enough, it would be difficult for a student to rent an apartment. Moreover, did all areas in the town have increased there rent. Since, it is average their may still places where the increase is not significant,
Lastly, the students who enroll look out for all the criteria before taking an admission, that include educational facilities and research laboratories. Author here has not considered the other important problems that have noticeable impact on enrollments.
To sum up, the author's argument is based on unsubstantiated assumptions. The author should have reinforced it more evidence. However, author should have addressed this issues that are this trends are sustainable and enough to make the decisions, rendering argument indefensible.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 299 350
No. of Characters: 1548 1500
No. of Different Words: 166 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.158 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.177 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.76 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 122 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 87 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 65 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 40 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.588 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.43 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.647 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.298 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.559 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.043 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 143, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Since” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ccommodate students in the near future. Since, the current trends presage that the en...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 73, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Although” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ble to be prepared for future problems. Although it is not reasonable to prescience the ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 134, Rule ID: NEEDS_FIXED[1]
Message: "needs based" is only accepted in certain dialects. For something more widely acceptable, try 'basing' or 'to be based'.
Suggestion: basing; to be based
...asonable to prescience the future needs based on the current trends. Because the reas...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 225, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...at are attracting the students presently towards Buckingham college might not be ...
^^
Line 3, column 276, Rule ID: IN_PAST[1]
Message: Did you mean: 'in the future'?
Suggestion: in the future
...uckingham college might not be the same in future, moreover, the students that are influx...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 354, Rule ID: NEAR_BY[1]
Message: Did you mean 'nearby'?
Suggestion: nearby
... are influx might from the same town or near by, they might prefer to be day scholars r...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 16, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...mpact on enrollments. To sum up, the authors argument is based on unsubstantiated as...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, lastly, look, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, to begin with, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 55.5748502994 61% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 16.3942115768 49% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1598.0 2260.96107784 71% => OK
No of words: 299.0 441.139720559 68% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.34448160535 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1583189471 4.56307096286 91% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86215924706 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 172.0 204.123752495 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.57525083612 0.468620217663 123% => OK
syllable_count: 491.4 705.55239521 70% => 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: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 59.3168135945 57.8364921388 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.875 119.503703932 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.6875 23.324526521 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0625 5.70786347227 124% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.25449101796 133% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => 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: 0.144784695983 0.218282227539 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0428487046741 0.0743258471296 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0619190620429 0.0701772020484 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.072051803816 0.128457276422 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0517635485404 0.0628817314937 82% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 14.3799401198 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.69 12.5979740519 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.28 8.32208582834 112% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 98.500998004 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 12.3882235529 57% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => 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.