The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of Alta Manufacturing.
“During the past year, Alta Manufacturing had 30 percent more on-the-job accidents than nearby Panoply Industries, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. Experts believe that a significant contributing factor in many accidents is fatigue caused by sleep deprivation among workers. Therefore, to reduce the number of on-the-job accidents at Alta, we recommend shortening each of our three work shifts by one hour. If we do this, our employees will get adequate amounts of sleep."
The author suggests that the shifts of workers at Alta Manufacturing have to be reduced by one hour each. This conclusion is based on the fact that the on-the-job incidents are 30 percent higher than the nearby Panoply Industries. The prompt also takes the help of experts' suggestion that sleep depravation could be a significant factor in causing these accidents. This reduced one hour time is supposed to give employees more time to sleep and thereby, be more attentive during their shift. However, before this conclusion can be evaluated, there are three questions that need to be answered.
Firstly, is the nature of work that is being carried out at Panolpy Industries similar to the one at Alta Manufacturing? Is the level of risk that the workers face at each of these companies comparable? The author does not provide any information related to the companies, or what kind of products they manufacture, to draw a correlation between the two. Perhaps, it could be the case that the work at Alta Manufacturing is more dangerous than the former, thereby causing more on-the-job accidents. If that is true, the argument that is presented in the prompt is not valid and hence demerits the conclusion drawn from it.
Secondly, is sleep deprevation really a significant factor in causing the accidents? Is the one hour difference in shifts causing as much as 30 percent increase in on-the-job accidents? This assumption was made based on the 'experts' belief' and not on actual data or proof. Maybe, the precautions taken to avoid on-the-job accidents at Alta Manufacturing are inffective and not upto the mark. It maybe the case that the equipment being used, or the infrastructure that they have, is not upto the code. If any of these is true, these factors could be causing more accidents to occur than sleep deprevation. Decreasing the work shifts by one hour does not solve these problems, but will incur losses to the company.
Thirdly, will the employees use this extra one hour that they have, to sleep? It could be the case that, with the extra time available in their hands, the workers might be searching for a new source of income and start working there simultaneously. In that case, the workers would now be more fatigue and sleep deprived than before the introduction of the plan. If that happens, the plan would clearly backfire and intensify the problem instead of solving it. So, the conclusion would not hold water unless the author could provide evidence that this extra one hour would be used by the workers to take rest.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 6 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 6 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 432 350
No. of Characters: 2062 1500
No. of Different Words: 189 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.559 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.773 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.624 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 127 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 103 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 64 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 52 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.636 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 4.195 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.297 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.464 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.048 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 225, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'experts'' or 'expert's'?
Suggestion: experts'; expert's
...? This assumption was made based on the experts belief and not on actual data or proof....
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, however, if, may, really, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.6327345309 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 28.8173652695 128% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 52.0 55.5748502994 94% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2130.0 2260.96107784 94% => OK
No of words: 432.0 441.139720559 98% => OK
Chars per words: 4.93055555556 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55901411391 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70512630635 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.460648148148 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 651.6 705.55239521 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 23.7229184441 57.8364921388 41% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 96.8181818182 119.503703932 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.6363636364 23.324526521 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.77272727273 5.70786347227 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 12.0 4.67664670659 257% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.247360939267 0.218282227539 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0795074987973 0.0743258471296 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0780343443999 0.0701772020484 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.167703047953 0.128457276422 131% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.062213308297 0.0628817314937 99% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 14.3799401198 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.3550499002 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.31 12.5979740519 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.91 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 98.500998004 92% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => 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.