The following appeared in a memorandum from the mayor of Wistfold.
“A recent study revealed that the number of children requiring medical attention for
illnesses in our town is 40 percent higher than in the neighboring town of Champsfield.
Last year the Champsfield school district implemented an educational program called
“Kerzac Plus” that promotes healthier habits among children. Because prepackaged
convenience foods have less nutritional value than fresh fruits and vegetables, Kerzac Plus
guidance led to banning the sale of candy bars and soft drinks in Champsfield schools.
Kerzac Plus also provides informational posters and live presentations for children that
explain the importance of healthy foods and exercise, as well as the risks of making
unhealthy lifestyle choices. The clearest explanation for the lower medical needs of
Champsfield’s children compared with Wistfold’s is the introduction of the Kerzac Plus
program to promote student health.”
The author states that the clearest reason for lower medical needs at Champsfield's children compared with Wistfold's is because of the introduction of the Kerzac Plus program. The author mentions many activities Kerzac plus carries out relating to the betterment of students' health. Statistics show that medical attention required for illness is 40 percent higher at Wistfold, where the Kerzac Plus plan was not implemented. However, before we evaluate the conclusion presented in the argument, three questions need to be answered.
Firstly, the author only gives us the difference in number of childern requiring medical attention in Wistfold, but does not talk about how the situation is, with respect to adults. It may be the case that even in the case of adults, the difference in need for medical attention is seen. It could be possible that the livibality of the town or the environment at Wistfold itself is bad compared to Champsfield. There are many factors like quality of food, water and shelter available at a town that affect the genral health of its population. If it is true that the adults in Champsfield are healthier than the adults at Wistfold, then it is evident that Kerzac Plus which was implemented only at a school level, has nothing to do with it and the conclusion drawn is not valid anymore.
Secondly, the arguments states that the 'number' of children requiring medical attention is higher at Wistfold, but fails to mention the total population of children present in either of the towns. It may be the case that Wistfold contains a higher number of children, naturally leading to more number of children needing medical attention. It may the case that even before the introduction of Kerzac Plus program, the number of children needing medical attention was lower at Champsfield since it has a lesser number of people to deal with. If it is true that the population of the towns is not comparable with Wistfold being in higher number, then the declaration that the Kerzac Plus program was the clearest explanation, does not hold water.
Thirdly, even if the difference in health patterns is seen only in children and that the populations of both the towns are similar, is there any evidence that Kerzac Plus is the only program that was launched in Champsfield? It was stated that the program has been initiated last year. There could be any number of plans that have been implemented in between that improved the health of the children. It could be the case that the governing body of the town has put in place a very successful health plan that spread awarness and increased the health index score of the town in general, irrespective of their age. The statement that the 'clearest' explanation is the introduction of the Kerzac Plus program has no supporting evidence provided in the argument and therefore could potentially not be true.
In conclusion, it could be true that the introduction of Kerzac Plus program itself was the cause for lower medical needs of Champsfield's children compared with Wistfold's. However, as it is stated, the argument is based on unstated assumptions, and the author needs to provide more evidence to support it. We can come to a conclusion once the three questions presented above are answered.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 9 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 6 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 547 350
No. of Characters: 2665 1500
No. of Different Words: 199 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.836 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.872 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.675 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 198 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 147 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 107 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 62 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 27.35 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.345 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.6 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.355 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.556 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.154 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, third, thirdly, in conclusion, in general, it is true, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 39.0 19.6327345309 199% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 24.0 13.6137724551 176% => OK
Pronoun: 43.0 28.8173652695 149% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 76.0 55.5748502994 137% => OK
Nominalization: 30.0 16.3942115768 183% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2737.0 2260.96107784 121% => OK
No of words: 547.0 441.139720559 124% => OK
Chars per words: 5.00365630713 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.83611736076 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73589273747 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 218.0 204.123752495 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.398537477148 0.468620217663 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 819.9 705.55239521 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.6232216855 57.8364921388 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.333333333 119.503703932 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.0476190476 23.324526521 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.04761904762 5.70786347227 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.237116074788 0.218282227539 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.084676987325 0.0743258471296 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0659748990481 0.0701772020484 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.147653779435 0.128457276422 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0618263571863 0.0628817314937 98% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 14.3799401198 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 48.3550499002 111% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.02 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.07 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 98.500998004 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.