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 workers at nearby Panoply Industries, where 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."
In this memo, the vice-president of Alta Manufacturing contends that the company’s employees run the risk of on-the-job accidents due to long working hours which lead to fatigue and thereby increase the likelihood of accidents. The arguer provides as evidence in support of his or her claims that fact that the neighboring Panoply Industries, which has one hour less work shifts, has a lower rate of on-the-job accidents. The arguer recommends that shorter work shifts by one hour will reduce the accidents rate, relying on the assumption that fatigue and lengthy shifts are interconnected to accidents. The reasoning of the argument is totally flawed as it is based upon unsubstantiated assumptions.
Firstly, the arguer falsely assumes that the statistical figures as presented are similar and could be fairly compared. Alta Manufacturing perhaps has more employees than Panoply Industries and as a result more people involved in the production lines, leading to more accidents and consequently at a higher rate. He or she should have provided more accurate data about the actual number of employees each industry has in order to accept the reliability of this analogy.
Additionally, the arguer overlooks other factors that may have caused the increased rate of on-the-job accidents, highlighting fatigue caused by sleep deprivation as the main and only one. Undoubtedly, it seems more a positive correlation rather than a casual connection. For instance, workers at Alta Manufacturing are likely to be less experienced or less familiar with health and safety rules. They could also manipulate heavy machinery and thus have much higher chances of an accident than those of Panoply Industries who may experience a simple and standard equipment. The author should have quoted that among all other factors analyzed, fatigue was found to be the critical one.
Second, we have no indication that the measure of shortening the three work shifts by one hour will necessarily lead to positive results. Perhaps, many other actions are required in order to achieve fewer accidents. For example, the industry needs to upgrade its manufacturing equipment or the workers need some training as they may feel unaware of some innovative techniques and standards. The author should have presented studies and analytical data that the reduced work shifts are the only measure in order to have a safer working environment. For the time being, we cannot accept the effectiveness and validity of the solution proposed. Moreover, nothing ensures that all the employees of the company will use this time proposed for adequate sleep. Some of them may decide to spend more time with their families, while others may choose to allot them for outdoor activities. Hence, the reliability of this argument is unwarranted and unconvincing. The arguer would preferably indicate evidence that all workers are determined to use the extra hour for sleep, but in its absence the proposal is scant and ambiguous.
The argument is weak since neither is the conclusion sound nor is the suggestion legitimate. Had there been substantial evidence, perhaps, the argument would have sounded more credible, but in its absence, it sounds 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: 23 15
No. of Words: 509 350
No. of Characters: 2651 1500
No. of Different Words: 254 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.75 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.208 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.824 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 200 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 158 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 109 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 73 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.13 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.93 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.522 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.275 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.48 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.09 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 611, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...shifts are interconnected to accidents. The reasoning of the argument is totally fl...
^^^
Line 7, column 212, Rule ID: MORE_A_JJ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'a more positive'?
Suggestion: a more positive
...ain and only one. Undoubtedly, it seems more a positive correlation rather than a casual connec...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, firstly, hence, if, look, may, moreover, second, so, thus, while, for example, for instance, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 11.1786427146 188% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 28.8173652695 118% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 55.5748502994 97% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 16.3942115768 134% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2726.0 2260.96107784 121% => OK
No of words: 509.0 441.139720559 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.35559921415 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.74984508646 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93765395412 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 261.0 204.123752495 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.512770137525 0.468620217663 109% => OK
syllable_count: 865.8 705.55239521 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.0628853922 57.8364921388 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.52173913 119.503703932 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.1304347826 23.324526521 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.91304347826 5.70786347227 104% => 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 : 14.0 6.88822355289 203% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.234733081717 0.218282227539 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.058436325022 0.0743258471296 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0634734440323 0.0701772020484 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125450752867 0.128457276422 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0694576923339 0.0628817314937 110% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 14.3799401198 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.3550499002 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 12.5979740519 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.13 8.32208582834 110% => OK
difficult_words: 142.0 98.500998004 144% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.