The following appeared as an opinion-editorial in a local newspaper:
In the last 10 years, the number of patrons to the local library has decreased by a factor of 5, while during that time the number of purchases of electronic books has increased by a factor of 10. The director of the library believes that the cause of the decrease in patrons is due to the library not advertising as effectively as do online merchants that sell electronic books. Therefore, the library should double the amount of money that it spends on advertising, so that more patrons will frequent the library.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered to help evaluate the recommendation, and whether the argument is reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions help to determine the extent to which the recommendation is justified.
Though, it could be possible that doubling the amount on advertising will attract more patrons. But the author's argument is based on some unwarranted assumptions which can be evaluated. Due to the lack of evidences and facts, the author's argument seems little far fetched.
To begin with, the author assumes that the decrease in number of patrons is somehow related to purchases of the electronic books. But, what if there are some other profound reasons responsible for the reduced number of patrons in the library. For example, what if the patrons of the local area formed a social group and devoting most of their time to that group rather going to the library. If this is the case, then increasing the advertising funds will not help the library in raising the number of patrons visiting the library.
Another assumption made by the author is that if the more advertising will definitely attracts patrons. The author did not mention the habits and lifestyle of the patrons. For once, let just assume that decrease in number patrons in library is caused by the electronic books. There should be a reason for the popularity of the electronics books. Patrons can easily access these electronic books while being in the comfort of their home, as opposed to going to library for reading the book. May be the library is located at a remote area, we can not tell for sure. In that case also increasing the funds on the advertising will not help library in restoring the number of patrons.
In summary the author's argument is flaw in many ways due to the lack of supporting evidences and has no legs to stand for. The argument could be strengthened if the author clearly mentioned relevant facts.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Though” 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.
Though, it could be possible that doubling the...
^^^^^^
Line 1, column 105, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...sing will attract more patrons. But the authors argument is based on some unwarranted a...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 231, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...to the lack of evidences and facts, the authors argument seems little far fetched. T...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 87, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'attract'
Suggestion: attract
...if the more advertising will definitely attracts patrons. The author did not mention the...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 495, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[8]
Message: The proper name in singular (May) must be used with a third-person verb: 'is'.
Suggestion: is
...ng to library for reading the book. May be the library is located at a remote area...
^^
Line 7, column 16, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...e number of patrons. In summary the authors argument is flaw in many ways due to th...
^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'if', 'may', 'so', 'then', 'while', 'for example', 'in summary', 'to begin with']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.236593059937 0.25644967241 92% => OK
Verbs: 0.167192429022 0.15541462614 108% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0694006309148 0.0836205057962 83% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0441640378549 0.0520304965353 85% => OK
Pronouns: 0.01261829653 0.0272364105082 46% => OK
Prepositions: 0.148264984227 0.125424944231 118% => OK
Participles: 0.0694006309148 0.0416121511921 167% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.5271373813 2.79052419416 91% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0283911671924 0.026700313972 106% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.148264984227 0.113004496875 131% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0315457413249 0.0255425247493 124% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00946372239748 0.0127820249294 74% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1701.0 2731.13054187 62% => OK
No of words: 292.0 446.07635468 65% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.82534246575 6.12365571057 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13376432452 4.57801047555 90% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.356164383562 0.378187486979 94% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.263698630137 0.287650121315 92% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.16095890411 0.208842608468 77% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.0856164383562 0.135150697306 63% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5271373813 2.79052419416 91% => OK
Unique words: 142.0 207.018472906 69% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.486301369863 0.469332199767 104% => OK
Word variations: 47.4819830404 52.1807786196 91% => OK
How many sentences: 16.0 20.039408867 80% => OK
Sentence length: 18.25 23.2022227129 79% => OK
Sentence length SD: 25.4330462932 57.7814097925 44% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.3125 141.986410481 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.25 23.2022227129 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.625 0.724660767414 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.14285714286 78% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 3.58251231527 167% => OK
Readability: 44.6198630137 51.9672348444 86% => OK
Elegance: 2.02816901408 1.8405768891 110% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.595235164017 0.441005458295 135% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.141442385519 0.135418324435 104% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0469637506902 0.0829849096947 57% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.625005072959 0.58762219726 106% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.098788175503 0.147661913831 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.287322638266 0.193483328276 148% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.120582727287 0.0970749176394 124% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.513597669636 0.42659136922 120% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.175557098403 0.0774707102158 227% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.416435277042 0.312017818177 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.142030168868 0.0698173142475 203% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.33743842365 120% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.87684729064 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.82512315271 21% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 9.0 6.46551724138 139% => OK
Negative topic words: 4.0 5.36822660099 75% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.82389162562 35% => OK
Total topic words: 14.0 14.657635468 96% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
More content wanted. For issue essays, around 450 words, for argument essays, around 400 words.
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.