The following appeared in a memo from New Ventures Consulting to the president of HobCo, Inc., a chain of hobby shops.
"Our team has completed its research on suitable building sites for a new HobCo hobby Shop in the city of Grilldon. We discovered that there are currently no hobby shops in southeastern Grilldon. When our researchers conducted a poll of area residents, 88 percent of those who responded indicated that they would welcome the opening of a hobby shop in southeastern Grilldon. Grilldon is in a region of the nation in which the hobby business has increased by 300 percent during the past decade. In addition, Grilldon has a very large population of retirees, a demographic with ample time to devote to hobbies. We therefore recommend that you choose southeastern Grilldon as the site for your next HobCo Hobby Shop. We predict that a shop in this area will draw a steady stream of enthusiastic new HobCo customers."
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 argument concludes that HobCo Should extend to Southeastern Grilldon as their next site for Hobco Hobby Shop as it will draw many enthusiastic new Hobco customers. Stated in this way, the conclusion is based on the premise that hobby business has increased, there are no hobby shop or competitors and there are many retired people in Grilldon. The reasoning of the argument is logically flawed, however, careful scrutiny of the evidence reveals that it provides little credible support for the author's conclusion. Hence, the argument can be considered unsubstantiated.
First of all, the author provides information that there are no hobby shop or competitors currently in Southeastern Grilldon. This is merely an assumption made without solid. For instance, what if there are number of companies planning to set their hobby shop in future, which could affect Hobco performance? Hence, the argument would have been much more convincing if it explicitly stated that HobCo inc will be the only Company licensed to set Hobby shops in Southeastern Grilldon.
The argument readily cites that 88% of the respondents want hobby shop in Southeastern Grilldon. This again is weak and unsupported claim as the reliability of the poll needs to be established. To illustrate further, how representative can the sample be? If the argument had provided evidence that the poll was unbiased, then it would have been a lot more convincing to the reader.
Finally, the author notes that hobby business has increased by 300% during the past decade in the region of the nation where Grilldon is. However, careful scrutiny of the evidence reveals that it provides little credible support for the author's conclusion in several critical respects. The author must provide evidence on the localized increase in the hobby business in Grilldon. More so, the argument claims there is a very large population of retirees in Grilldon. This claim would strengthened if the number of retirees is quantified. And if an established survey, showing the percentage of retired people who are enthusiastic about hobby activities, is conducted. Without these evidences, the claim remains weak.
In conclusion, the author's argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it further, the author must provide more concrete evidence, perhaps by way of a reliable survey of suitable building sites for Hobco hobby shop in the city of Grilldon. Lastly, to better assess the argument, it would be necessary to know more information about why no hobby shop can be found currently in Southeastern Grilldon.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 411 350
No. of Characters: 2107 1500
No. of Different Words: 190 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.503 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.127 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.805 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 155 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 124 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 99 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 48 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.682 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.672 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.591 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.324 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.502 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.065 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 499, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...rovides little credible support for the authors conclusion. Hence, the argument can be ...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 261, Rule ID: IN_PAST[1]
Message: Did you mean: 'in the future'?
Suggestion: in the future
...panies planning to set their hobby shop in future, which could affect Hobco performance? ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 238, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...rovides little credible support for the authors conclusion in several critical respects...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 485, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'would' requires the base form of the verb: 'strengthen'
Suggestion: strengthen
... retirees in Grilldon. This claim would strengthened if the number of retirees is quantified...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 20, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...aim remains weak. In conclusion, the authors argument is unpersuasive as it stands. ...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 294, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... to better assess the argument, it would be necessary to know more information ab...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, hence, however, if, lastly, so, then, thus, for instance, in conclusion, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 55.5748502994 85% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2170.0 2260.96107784 96% => OK
No of words: 411.0 441.139720559 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.2798053528 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50256981431 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89182140742 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 188.0 204.123752495 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.457420924574 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 674.1 705.55239521 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 44.6040431033 57.8364921388 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.6363636364 119.503703932 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.6818181818 23.324526521 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.59090909091 5.70786347227 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.229097428232 0.218282227539 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0691920436687 0.0743258471296 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0809473794051 0.0701772020484 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.149192736167 0.128457276422 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0688869745459 0.0628817314937 110% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 14.3799401198 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.34 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.37 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 98.500998004 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.