The following appeared in a memo at XYZ company.
"When XYZ lays off employees, it pays Delany Personnel Firm to offer those employees assistance in creating résumés and developing interviewing skills, if they so desire. Laid-off employees have benefited greatly from Delany's services: last year those who used Delany found jobs much more quickly than did those who did not. Recently, it has been proposed that we use the less expensive Walsh Personnel Firm in place of Delany. This would be a mistake because eight years ago, when XYZ was using Walsh, only half of the workers we laid off at that time found jobs within a year. Moreover, Delany is clearly superior, as evidenced by its bigger staff and larger number of branch offices. After all, last year Delany's clients took an average of six months to find jobs, whereas Walsh's clients took nine."
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The author in the given prompt states how XYZ should not tie up with Walsh and continue with Delany for providing laid off employees better chance to get newer jobs, he gives statistics of the previous years and shows how he beleives that Delany Personnel Firm has a bigger reach and effectiveness than Walsh. The following arguements will show how the unstated arguements considered by the author if proofed will make the claims unwarrented.
The author shows how the employees laid off last year, with the help of Delany Personnel Firm were able to find jobs much quickly than those who did not use the firm. This statement is does not give a clear picture of the jobs which the laid off employs got, the may be menial jobs at a local firm or may be low paying jobs and people who didn't get a job may not want to do such jobs. It can also be stated that what happened last year may be a mere coincident and the coming year none of the people from firm find a job and the non firm employees do get a job. So, it cannot be assumed that if one year in the past more people got a job from Delany Personnel Firm it will reciprocate it every year. It is a question of chance and opportuninty. So, even using a cheaper firm will also not hinder chances of people who get the right chance and are capable of capturing it.
Using a cheaper firm like Walsh may not be a mistake as people get jobs based on their skills and the firm just provides them with openings and other small helps. If the company wants to save some coins in this, they may. Walsh Personnel Firm should not be disposed on what happened between it and XYZ laid off employee eight years ago, as a lot has changed. It may be that eight years ago it was a time of financial crisis and so only half the fired employess got a job using Walsh Personnel firm. The market now may have optimum jobs for all fired employees.
The author finally compares the two firms and thinks they should not switch to Walsh as Delany has more employees, more number of branch offices. This can however be deceving, it may be that Delany has a lot of branch offices but all them are spread over a small area and cover the same job openings. While covering very few openings. Walsh may have lesser offices but may cover a larger area and not overlap the openings in an area by multiple offices reporting them. So in this way Walsh may cover more jobs than Delany and be more helpful for employees trying to find jobs after layoff. Also, it may client of Delany to find jobs quicker and Walsh clients to take longer times, but this can change anytime as the market fluctuates, it also may be that Delany clients get jobs for name sake and don't really like the jobs they are doing while Walsh employees wait for the jobs they really want do, thus taking a longer time.
The following arguements provided if proofed true, weaken the claims made by the author and weaken his case of not switching to Walsh Personnel firm from Delany Personnel Firm.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 16 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 10 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 558 350
No. of Characters: 2389 1500
No. of Different Words: 230 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.86 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.281 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.12 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 141 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 80 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 53 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 34 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 27.9 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 14.321 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.8 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.346 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.541 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.155 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ed will make the claims unwarrented. The author shows how the employees laid off...
^^^
Line 3, column 340, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...r may be low paying jobs and people who didnt get a job may not want to do such jobs....
^^^^^
Line 7, column 302, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “While” 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.
...l area and cover the same job openings. While covering very few openings. Walsh may h...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 798, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...lany clients get jobs for name sake and dont really like the jobs they are doing whi...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, however, if, may, really, so, thus, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 25.0 12.9520958084 193% => OK
Conjunction : 23.0 11.1786427146 206% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 35.0 28.8173652695 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 50.0 55.5748502994 90% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 16.3942115768 12% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2439.0 2260.96107784 108% => OK
No of words: 556.0 441.139720559 126% => OK
Chars per words: 4.38669064748 5.12650576532 86% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.85588840946 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.15487367131 2.78398813304 77% => OK
Unique words: 241.0 204.123752495 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.43345323741 0.468620217663 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 735.3 705.55239521 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.59920159681 81% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 4.96107784431 222% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 74.0232902538 57.8364921388 128% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.95 119.503703932 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.8 23.324526521 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.05 5.70786347227 53% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.188779692527 0.218282227539 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0693431801541 0.0743258471296 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0606304321952 0.0701772020484 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125049526081 0.128457276422 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0288460266102 0.0628817314937 46% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 14.3799401198 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 69.45 48.3550499002 144% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 8.48 12.5979740519 67% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.91 8.32208582834 83% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 98.500998004 69% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 12.3882235529 145% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.