The vice president of Quiot Manufacturing recommends that Quiot Manufacturing should reduce each of three work shifts by one hour can enable workers more sleep and then diminish work accidents. The assumption behind the argument is that Quiot Manufacturing and Panoply Industries plant has comparisons and experts’ saying is persuasive to make Quiot change significantly. Unfortunately, these assumptions might be void of justification, thereby weakening the argument and the conclusion.
Firstly, the vice president of Quiot Manufacturing assumes Quiot Manufacturing has more on-the-job accidents than at Panoply Industries because there is one hours shorter than theirs. If changing into one hour shorter work shifts can considerably reduce the risk of more accidents on jobs. However, the vice president should measure the similarities and disparities between both of two industries. For example, Quiot Manufacturing is a metal processing or mineral-mining company, but Panoply is a clothing-producing company. In that case, the risk of more accidents in Quiot are possibly higher than Panoply. Given both of them are the same, Quiot is a larger-scale company with 100,000 workers but Panoply with 1,000, meaning that they have naturally more accidents in Quiot Manufacturing. If the assumption proves unjustified, shortening one hours in every three work shifts is not an efficacious action for Quiot Manufacturing.
Secondly, the second assumption is that experts’ words are closely related to the situation in Quiot. Therefore, the vice president considers sleep deprivation and fatigue is the most serious reason of more accidents in Quito Manufacturing. Examining the authoritativeness and representativeness of experts is the priority of Quiot. Firstly, how many experts say the words? Are they a multitude of experts in Manufacturing industry? If only several experts say but a large number of experts refute the analysis of those experts, it might be incredible to indicate that they should reduce work shift time. When some manufacturing plants might have severe issue of on-the-job accidents owing to sleep deprivation, their delivered opinion might be biased and precautious. As a matter of fact, this is not the issue of Quiot which should address when facing more accidents in the workplace.
Speculating that Quiot and Panoply are the similar plant manufacturings and experts’ presumption is the situation quiot is confronting, the assumption that reduction of one hour shorter work shift can reduce on-the-job accidents should be prudently examined. Quiot might make a survey to investigate how their workers utilize the after-work times with one more hour. They might sing Karaoke with imitate friends or take care of children, as well as surfing the internet, which might squander time with more recreation instead of rest. More exhaustion with less sleep time would have impact on their works with inattentiveness along with more accidents during working time. Therefore, the vice president should give another thought on how to warrant workers to invest one more resting hour in sleeping.
To conclude it, the vice president tends to significantly reduce accidents of jobs, which is a good advice. However, if the assumptions discussed aforementioned are not assessed with more contemplation, the final suggestion and the whole argument are not convincing to readers.
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: 517 350
No. of Characters: 2817 1500
No. of Different Words: 233 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.768 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.449 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.113 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 202 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 166 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 109 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 91 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.68 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.874 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.56 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.33 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.508 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.103 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 154, Rule ID: ONE_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use the numeral 'one' with plural words. Did you mean 'one hour', 'an hour', or simply 'hours'?
Suggestion: one hour; an hour; hours
... at Panoply Industries because there is one hours shorter than theirs. If changing into o...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 185, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...there is one hours shorter than theirs. If changing into one hour shorter work shi...
^^
Line 3, column 841, Rule ID: ONE_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use the numeral 'one' with plural words. Did you mean 'one hour', 'an hour', or simply 'hours'?
Suggestion: one hour; an hour; hours
...sumption proves unjustified, shortening one hours in every three work shifts is not an ef...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 471, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...dustry? If only several experts say but a large number of experts refute the analysis of those ex...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 94, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[3]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'good advice'.
Suggestion: good advice
...ntly reduce accidents of jobs, which is a good advice. However, if the assumptions discussed ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, well, for example, as a matter of fact, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 11.1786427146 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 28.8173652695 76% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 55.5748502994 112% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2902.0 2260.96107784 128% => OK
No of words: 517.0 441.139720559 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.61315280464 5.12650576532 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.76839952204 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.24322754252 2.78398813304 116% => OK
Unique words: 236.0 204.123752495 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.456479690522 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 894.6 705.55239521 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => 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: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.9923227772 57.8364921388 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.08 119.503703932 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.68 23.324526521 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.92 5.70786347227 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 6.88822355289 189% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.405142937308 0.218282227539 186% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.127926208246 0.0743258471296 172% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.110782107773 0.0701772020484 158% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.241327701779 0.128457276422 188% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.125568978723 0.0628817314937 200% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 14.3799401198 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.3550499002 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.26 12.5979740519 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.32 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 121.0 98.500998004 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.