The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of a company that builds shopping malls around the country.
"The surface of a section of Route 101, paved just two years ago by Good Intentions Roadways, is now badly cracked with a number of dangerous potholes. In another part of the state, a section of Route 40, paved by Appian Roadways more than four years ago, is still in good condition. In a demonstration of their continuing commitment to quality, Appian Roadways recently purchased state-of-the-art paving machinery and hired a new quality-control manager. Therefore, I recommend hiring Appian Roadways to construct the access roads for all our new shopping malls. I predict that our Appian access roads will not have to be repaired for at least four years."
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 topic was about recommending Appian Roadways to construct roads for new shopping malls because of their commitment to quality and the constructions are long-lasting, overall they hiring new quality control manager and purchased the new paving machine. The following argument is based on unwarranted assumptions and flawed for numerous reasons.
Primarily, the author argued that Route 40 roadway was long-lasting than Route 101 because Appine roadways construct it and also conclude that the Appine construction is better. The author assumed that the conditions were analogous in two parts, it might be possible that because of the environment and heavy vehicle load the Route 101 badly cracked. On the other hand, even though Route 40 was constructed 4 years ago, due to less vehicle load the road was still in good conditions.
The author claimed that Appine construction continuing commitment to quality and they purchased cutting edge machines. The author does not compare other construction companies with Appine and never demonstrated the other works rather than Route 40. It might be possible that there are many companies better than Appine construction and also have new technologies and better workers. It might be possible that because of using new technologies the cost of Appine construction also higher.
At last the author claimed that Appine access road does not need to be repaired for four years and also recommended on constructing new roads for shopping malls. The author made this assumption only on single work of Appine construction. The author also assumed those good roads also be a reason for the success of shopping malls. It might be possible that in spite of good roads the location of the shopping mall is in a remote place and since the other than Route 40, other works of Appine does not study they might fail to provide sufficient quality to the construction.
The end of the argument, because the argument makes several unwarranted assumptions, the author fails to make a convincing case which can prove that Appine construction is better than others and also made the authors' argument more sound.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 14 15
No. of Words: 346 350
No. of Characters: 1764 1500
No. of Different Words: 153 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.313 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.098 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.699 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 123 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 88 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 59 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 40 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.714 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.743 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.571 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.416 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.644 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.124 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 44, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'roadway' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'roadways'.
Suggestion: roadways
...marily, the author argued that Route 40 roadway was long-lasting than Route 101 because...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 210, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...is better than others and also made the authors argument more sound.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, so, still, in spite of, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 28.8173652695 73% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 55.5748502994 52% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1794.0 2260.96107784 79% => OK
No of words: 346.0 441.139720559 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.18497109827 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31289638616 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7533145638 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 158.0 204.123752495 77% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.456647398844 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 539.1 705.55239521 76% => 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: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
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: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.715365229 57.8364921388 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.142857143 119.503703932 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.7142857143 23.324526521 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.35714285714 5.70786347227 59% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0895364504691 0.218282227539 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0389044223559 0.0743258471296 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0305069222252 0.0701772020484 43% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0536272686415 0.128457276422 42% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0366563711144 0.0628817314937 58% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 14.3799401198 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.06 12.5979740519 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.84 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 98.500998004 67% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.