The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of Quiot Manufacturing. "During the past year, Quiot Manufacturing had 30 percent more on-the-job accidents than at the nearby Panoply Industries plant, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. Experts say that significant contributing factors in many on-the-job accidents are fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers. Therefore, to reduce the number of on-the-job accidents at Quiot and thereby increase productivity, we should shorten each of our three work shifts by one hour so that employees will get adequate amounts of sleep."
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The vice president of Quiot Manufacturing argues that the company should shorten each of the three work shifts by one hour, letting the employees get adequate amount of sleep. However, there are several assumptions that the vice president need to state to strengthen the argument.
During the past year, Quiot Manufacturing had 30 percent more on-the-job accidents than Panoply, where the work shifts are one hour shorter. This argument only compares Quiot with one nearby company, Panoply, which we don't know the type the company is. Different types of companies may have different kind of on-the job accidents rate. For example, if the Panoply's works are less dangerous than Quiot, it was likely that they would had a lower on-the-job rate than Quiot. Even if Quiot and Panoply are same type of companies are their on-the-job accidents rates are comparable, this statement is based on one year period, which is not long enough to tell the long-term trend. If last year's data of both companies are outliers over the long-term, then the statement is not statistically rigorous. We need to observe two same types of companies for a longer time-period to judge the statement.
The experts mentioned in the argument claims that significant contributing factors in many on-the-job accidents are fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers. This statement doesn't mention the background of the experts. If the experts are some college graduates researching fatigue issues on employees, then the results are questionable and needed further verification. Even if the experts are well-know experts regarding sleeping, it's still too early to say that on-the-job accidents are related to fatigue and sleep deprivation, since these two things are hard to measure.
In the conclusion part, the vice president suggests that Quiot Manufacturing should shorten the three work shifts by one hour, allowing the employees have adequate amounts of sleep. This argugment is based on the previous observation between Quiot's and Panoply's on-the-job accidents rate, which is a questionable observations mentioned above. Even if the observation is correct, we still need evidence to prove that one hour is the best reduction to improve the productivity.
Thus, the vice president needs to state the assumptions above to strengthen his argument.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 368 350
No. of Characters: 1919 1500
No. of Different Words: 180 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.38 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.215 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.786 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 134 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 115 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 79 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 65 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.647 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.606 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.529 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.354 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.593 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.128 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 282, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ed to state to strengthen the argument. During the past year, Quiot Manufacturin...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 219, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...h one nearby company, Panoply, which we dont know the type the company is. Different...
^^^^
Line 5, column 433, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'would' requires the base form of the verb: 'have'
Suggestion: have
...an Quiot, it was likely that they would had a lower on-the-job rate than Quiot. Eve...
^^^
Line 5, column 685, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'years'' or 'year's'?
Suggestion: years'; year's
...gh to tell the long-term trend. If last years data of both companies are outliers ove...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 893, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ger time-period to judge the statement. The experts mentioned in the argument cl...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 177, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...privation among workers. This statement doesnt mention the background of the experts. ...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 578, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e these two things are hard to measure. In the conclusion part, the vice preside...
^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 314, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'observation'?
Suggestion: observation
...accidents rate, which is a questionable observations mentioned above. Even if the observatio...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 477, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... reduction to improve the productivity. Thus, the vice president needs to state ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, may, regarding, so, still, then, thus, well, for example, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 55.5748502994 85% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1977.0 2260.96107784 87% => OK
No of words: 366.0 441.139720559 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.40163934426 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37391431897 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83453320995 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 204.123752495 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.516393442623 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 594.9 705.55239521 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.9612864742 57.8364921388 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.294117647 119.503703932 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5294117647 23.324526521 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.88235294118 5.70786347227 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 5.25449101796 171% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.336317206319 0.218282227539 154% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.111758793598 0.0743258471296 150% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.135759384273 0.0701772020484 193% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.166767924213 0.128457276422 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.104053911055 0.0628817314937 165% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 14.3799401198 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.04 12.5979740519 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.09 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 98.500998004 80% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.