The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of a food distribution company with food storage warehouses in several cities.
"Recently, we signed a contract with the Fly-Away Pest Control Company to provide pest control services at our warehouse in Palm City, but last month we discovered that over $20,000 worth of food there had been destroyed by pest damage. Meanwhile, the Buzzoff Pest Control Company, which we have used for many years in Palm City, continued to service our warehouse in Wintervale, and last month only $10,000 worth of the food stored there had been destroyed by pest damage. This difference in pest damage is best explained by the negligence of Fly-Away."
Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.
The vice president of a food distribution company claims that the Fly-Away is negligent in controlling the pests and provides several reasons that seem to uphold his/her claim. However, the memo is rife with holes and assumptions and should be eradicated in order for the vice president to maintain his claim with clear warrant. Such flaws would be discussed further in details below.
First of all, the author of the memo assumes that because $20,000 worth of food had been destroyed due to pests last month, Fly-Away Pest control is not doing their job well. However, only a month of data is not enough to judge whether the company is negligent. Maybe they were presenting their best efforts in controlling the pests and were actually showing good results when a certain change in the environment happened last month and caused extensive number of pests to flourish. The climate could have increased abnormally and pests to increase in it numbers, causing numerous amount of food to get destroyed. Moreover, maybe last month the climate was germane for crops to grow and copious amount of food that are worth a billion dollars were produced. If this is the case, then $20,000 amount of food damage could be considered trivial.
Furthermore, the vice president assumes that because there aren't much food damaged by pests in Wintervale, the same should happen in Palm City. However, they are obviously two different places and cannot be easily compared. Maybe Wintervale is a very cold place and has a harsh environment for pests to thrive, which makes it easier for the Buzzoff to control the pests. Buzzoff may not even be doing their job properly and still gets to escape the critical judgment of the vice president because not many pests can survive the stark environment of Wintervale. Also, the amount of food stored in the storage in Palm City and Wintervale may be very different. There is a possibility that Palm City has much more food stored which makes them to have a higher potential of foods getting infected by the pests. If $20,000 amount of food are damaged by pests among $40,000 worth of food being stored in Palm City and $10,000 worth of food destroyed by pests among $20,000 worth of food being stored Wintervale, then the ratio of the pest damage is the same. This cannot be the cause of the vice president to assume that the pest control company in Palm City is not doing their job properly.
Last but not least, the author assumes that pest control should be prioritized in its emergence. However, there could be various reasons in foods getting damaged. Foods can be destroyed by abnormally hot weather, malfunction of the refrigerator and lack of caution of the workers. Maybe such causes are much more dominant reasons in foods getting destroyed and the proportion of stored food getting damaged by the pests is negligible enough. If this is the case, then the vice president should be looking for ways to solve such problems instead of questioning the negligence of the pest control company.
To sum up, even though the vice president of the food distribution company's claim seems plausible, through thorough investigation and reading the memo from various point of views, it is confirmed that his/her claim is unwarranted. In order for the author of the memo to uphold his/her claim, he/she would have to provide lucid information, not make any haste assumptions, and not compare the two data that are obviously incomparable.
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement It is more important for governments to spend money to improve Internet access than to improve public transportation Use specific reasons and example to support your answer 76
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position 66
- To be an effective leader a public official must maintain the highest ethical and moral standards Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim In developing and supporting your position be sure to address 54
- In an effort to encourage ecologically sustainable forestry practices an international organization started issuing certifications to wood companies that meet high ecological standards by conserving resources and recycling materials Companies that receive 3
- The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station Over the past year our late night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news During this period most of the complaints re 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 60, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
...ce president assumes that because there arent much food damaged by pests in Winterval...
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, look, may, moreover, so, still, then, well, first of all, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 37.0 19.6327345309 188% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 11.1786427146 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 75.0 55.5748502994 135% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2863.0 2260.96107784 127% => OK
No of words: 585.0 441.139720559 133% => OK
Chars per words: 4.89401709402 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.9180050066 4.56307096286 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52766705438 2.78398813304 91% => OK
Unique words: 240.0 204.123752495 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.410256410256 0.468620217663 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 856.8 705.55239521 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.3062841226 57.8364921388 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.291666667 119.503703932 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.375 23.324526521 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.04166666667 5.70786347227 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.322514445388 0.218282227539 148% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.101009394386 0.0743258471296 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0723076399 0.0701772020484 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.196437179947 0.128457276422 153% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0550793826912 0.0628817314937 88% => OK
automated_readability_index: 13.8 14.3799401198 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.3550499002 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.38 12.5979740519 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.82 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 98.500998004 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 9 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 5 2
No. of Sentences: 24 15
No. of Words: 590 350
No. of Characters: 2811 1500
No. of Different Words: 238 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.928 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.764 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.447 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 186 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 141 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 78 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 58 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.583 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.916 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.625 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.314 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.314 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.105 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5