Author of this recommendation offers to decrease funding for education for a next decade and reduce funding for athletic playing fields as birthrate in Calatrava dropped in a past five years. In reverse, author recommend to increase funding of facilities and programs for adults as it is expected a growth of adult population in the city. Although, author's logic may seem correct, there are numbers of loopholes in it, so careful scrutiny of the argument proves it's flawed logic.
Firstly, committee assumes that decreased birthrate for sure will lead to significantly reduced amount of students enrolled in local public schools. It is not always so. If in nearest future a lot of people set down in Calatrava with their families, amount of students in public school may remain the same or ever increase. Author provides no additional information about the city and its population in a recent years. It is quite possible that population is growing because people like the city and relocate there with kids.
Another proposal committee makes is to reduce funding of athletic playing fields and other recreational facilities. Authors assumption is that it will become unused and abandoned with theoretical decrease of children in the city. Nevertheless, athletic playing fields and recreational facilities can be used more frequently by adults, rather than by kids. Who is the mainly using those places now? There is no evidence that now they are devoted only for kids. Even if it is proves to be true, adults also can use them, so it would be premature to decrease funding of playing fields and recreational facilities.
Finally, committee suggest to increase funding of facilities and programs for adults, as growth of adult population is expected. First of all, author provide nothing to convince us that it really happen. What are premises of such expectations?
Secondly, even if turns to be true, increase of adult population after some period of time can also increase birthrate in a city.
In conclusion, argument is unpersuasive as it stands. There are some missing information in it, so in order to bolster his opinion, author should provide more evidence that child's population in city will decrease. In addition, it would be helpful to fully understand situation with a city's adult population and how it changed in recent years. We would also need some statistic data about current usage of athletic playing fields and recreational facilities.
- There is little justification for society to make extraordinary efforts—especially at a great cost in money and jobs—to save endangered animal or plant species.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the st 50
- Universities should require every student to take a variety of courses outside the student's field of study. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sur 79
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. 54
- The following appeared as a recommendation by a committee planning a ten-year budget for the city of Calatrava."The birthrate in our city is declining: in fact, last year's birthrate was only one-half that of five years ago. Thus the number of students en 16
- Altruism in meerkat and humans 3
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 172, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'in the nearest'.
Suggestion: in the nearest
...public schools. It is not always so. If in nearest future a lot of people set down in Cala...
Line 2, column 411, Rule ID: A_PLURAL
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'year'?
...the city and its population in a recent years. It is quite possible that population i...
Line 5, column 77, Rule ID: PERIOD_OF_TIME
Message: Use simply 'period'.
...increase of adult population after some period of time can also increase birthrate in a city. ...
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, firstly, if, may, nevertheless, really, second, secondly, so, in conclusion, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2052.0 2260.96107784 91% => OK
No of words: 398.0 441.139720559 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.15577889447 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46653527281 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79590782721 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.494974874372 0.468620217663 106% => OK
syllable_count: 657.0 705.55239521 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Interrogative: 2.0 0.471057884232 425% => OK
Article: 0.0 8.76447105788 0% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 43.7107320823 57.8364921388 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.2727272727 119.503703932 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.0909090909 23.324526521 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.04545454545 5.70786347227 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.20758483034 158% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0977641594916 0.218282227539 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0277425141099 0.0743258471296 37% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0316713005128 0.0701772020484 45% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0528923730166 0.128457276422 41% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0302485281917 0.0628817314937 48% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
automated_readability_index: 11.9 14.3799401198 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 48.3550499002 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.35 12.5979740519 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.42 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 98.500998004 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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: 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.