The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of a company that builds shopping malls throughout the country.
"The surface of a section of Route 101, paved two years ago by McAdam Road Builders, is now badly cracked and marred by dangerous potholes. In another part of the state, a section of Route 66, paved by Appian Roadways more than four years ago, is still in good condition. Appian Roadways has recently purchased state-of-the-art paving machinery, and it has hired a new quality-control manager. Because of its superior work and commitment to quality, we should contract with Appian Roadways rather than McAdam Road Builders to construct the access roads for all our new shopping malls."
The author of the argument cited that, the roads in one part of the state which was constructed by McAdam Road Builders two years ago has weathered down and is dangerous for the people traveling on that road. However, road constructed four years ago by Appian Roadways in other part of the city is still in good condition. The conclusion derived by the author that Appian Roadways is better choice for them to construct road might appear logical at first glance. However, a more critical analysis of the justification supplied by the author has highlighted many questions. Therefore, the premise in their current form are not cogent and argument is rife with unwarranted assumptions which make it more susceptible to attack.
To begin with, the author has not taken into consideration the amount traffic on each road. Maybe, Route 101 is the main highway and more frequently used by the travellers. Maybe, Route 101 is mostly used by heavy duty vehichles such as loaded trucks or buses. Which will surely lead to more wear and tear of the road if compared to other routes which have low intensity of traffic. There might be a possibility that traffic on Route 66 is very low and people rarely use that route.
Moreover, Route 101 can be the road which is connected to all the state and if anyone has to go from one part to other has to take Route 101.
Secondly, the author does mention about the new technology that Appian Roadways have recently acquired and has hire a new quality-control manager. However, the author does not mention anything about the technology which McAdam Road Builders have. There can be a possibility that McAdam Road Builders already have the technologies or even more advance than Appian Roadways have recently acquired. The author does not mention anything about the new quality-manager Appian Roadways have hired, new always does not means it is good. Maybe the former manager was far more skilled than the new one. Therefore, the author has not provided enough evidence to make the argument convincing.
Thirdly, the author should have also checked the quality of the materials that are used by both the companies. Moreover, he should have the labour force and the skills of the manager who will lead the construction. That could have provided more clear picture of the company which is to be preferred for the task. However, the author have failed to analyze the fact.
To sum up, the author's argument is based on unsubstantiated presumptions. The author should have reinforced his argument with more evidence to make the case stronger. The author should have compared both the companies on equal grounds. However, the author failed to examine the facts thereby rendering the argument indefensible.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 25 15
No. of Words: 460 350
No. of Characters: 2225 1500
No. of Different Words: 203 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.631 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.837 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.541 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 153 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 105 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 74 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 40 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.4 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.325 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.64 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.342 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.544 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.145 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 512, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[3]
Message: The verb 'does' requires base form of the verb: 'mean'
Suggestion: mean
...oadways have hired, new always does not means it is good. Maybe the former manager wa...
^^^^^
Line 10, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...hor have failed to analyze the fact. To sum up, the authors argument is based...
^^^
Line 11, column 16, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... analyze the fact. To sum up, the authors argument is based on unsubstantiated pr...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, third, thirdly, as to, such as, to begin with, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 28.8173652695 52% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 55.5748502994 92% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2286.0 2260.96107784 101% => OK
No of words: 460.0 441.139720559 104% => OK
Chars per words: 4.96956521739 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.6311565067 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62077276876 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 210.0 204.123752495 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.45652173913 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 708.3 705.55239521 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 16.0 8.76447105788 183% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
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: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.7514207108 57.8364921388 58% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 91.44 119.503703932 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.4 23.324526521 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.48 5.70786347227 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.67664670659 235% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.102815453029 0.218282227539 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0324811616675 0.0743258471296 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0424908987199 0.0701772020484 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0648979345569 0.128457276422 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0502382993174 0.0628817314937 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.2 14.3799401198 78% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 48.3550499002 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.197005988 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.34 8.32208582834 88% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 98.500998004 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.