The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of Butler Manufacturing.
"During the past year, workers at Butler Manufacturing reported 30 percent more on-the-job accidents than workers at nearby Panoply Industries, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. A recent government study reports that fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers are significant contributing factors in many on-the-job accidents. If we shorten each of our work shifts by one hour, we can improve Butler Manufacturing's safety record by ensuring that our employees are adequately rested."
In the argument, the president of Butler Manufacturing concludes that shortening work shifts by one hour will reduce on-the-job accidents. The author comes to this conclusion based on a recent government study and a comparison with nearby Panoply Industry. As it stands, the author’s contention might be valid, however, if the president wishes to bolster the credibility of the statement, he must provide three pieces of crucial evidence.
Firstly, the author assumes that 30 percent is similar for Butler Manufacturing and Panoply Industry. But this might not be the case, Perhaps, the number of workers in Butler Manufacturing is very high. 30 percent of, let’s say 5000 workers is quite a high number. Panoply Industries might not have as many workers and 30 percent of their total workers might be very less. Moreover, maybe the floor manager in Panoply Industry takes more safety precautions than the floor manager in Butler Manufacturing. If either of these scenarios prove true, then the author’s contention of reducing work shifts by 1 hour does not hold water.
Secondly, the president of Butler Manufacturing presumes that when the workers are let go 1 hour early, they use this time to take adequate rest. But this might be wrong, it might be that the workers spend this time watching movies and playing video games. Furthermore, the workers might use this early leave to spend quality time with their families. If either of these scenarios prove true, then the persuasiveness of the authors argument is drastically hindered.
Finally, the author assumes that Panoply Industry and Butler Manufacturing are identical. But, it might be that Panoply Industry pays a lot more attention to safety of the workers than in Butler Manufacturing. In addition to that, Panoply Industry might have a more relaxed time constraint whereas in Butler Manufacturing due to limited time the workers are forced to take more risks. If these situations are the case, then the authors contention that Butler Manufacuring should shorten the work hours is not persuasive.
In conclusion, if the president of Butler Manufacturing wished to enhance the validity of the argument, he must provide three pieces of crucial evidence.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 1 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 357 350
No. of Characters: 1813 1500
No. of Different Words: 156 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.347 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.078 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.747 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 136 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 104 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 62 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 39 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.833 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 4.729 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.778 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.366 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.575 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.128 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 440, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ovide three pieces of crucial evidence. Firstly, the author assumes that 30 perc...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 425, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ve true, then the persuasiveness of the authors argument is drastically hindered. F...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 429, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...these situations are the case, then the authors contention that Butler Manufacuring sho...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, whereas, in addition, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 55.5748502994 67% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1875.0 2260.96107784 83% => OK
No of words: 357.0 441.139720559 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.25210084034 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34677393335 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84947342151 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 162.0 204.123752495 79% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.453781512605 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 576.0 705.55239521 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 29.0591138675 57.8364921388 50% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 104.166666667 119.503703932 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8333333333 23.324526521 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.44444444444 5.70786347227 130% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.32286683942 0.218282227539 148% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.120781327152 0.0743258471296 163% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0749000437477 0.0701772020484 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.19322764211 0.128457276422 150% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0842478601157 0.0628817314937 134% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.3550499002 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.17 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.94 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 98.500998004 77% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.