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 enrolled in our public schools will soon decrease dramatically, and we can safely reduce the funds budgeted for education during the next decade. At the same time, we can reduce funding for athletic playing fields and other recreational facilities. As a result, we will have sufficient money to fund city facilities and programs used primarily by adults, since we can expect the adult population of the city to increase."
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.
While the assumptions of the argument is seemingly cogent, the author fails to explain the population make up for the public schools in the state of Calatrava. The pubic schools could be enrolled majorly by out of state student which would mean that the population rate of the school will significantly remain stable.
Additionally, the recommendation further maintains that since there is a decline in birthrate it is tantamount to a reduction of school age students within the next decades and so the there can also be reduction in funding of athletic playing fields and other recreational facilities with the hope that only the young use such facilities in isolation without use by adult which is not proven by any reliable research survey adopted by the author.
Although if it can be proven that there is a significant decline in student enrollment and overall population of students in the state based on a demographic survey then it could be a reliable suggestion to cut out fund and prioritize for the betterment of all the citizens.
Moreso, the author assumes that the funds gotten from the reduction of public school, playing fields and recreational facilities funding will be more than sufficient enough for funding of city facilities and programs used primarily by adults without data on budget allocation of the mentioned amenities.
In all, the author makes a lot of assumption that are based on on ideas not fully backed by qualitative data and thus the conclusion is flawed. Though the recommendation could have been strengthen by demographic information of the state and further strengthen by the data on the ratio of international and out of state student population to in state student ration in the respective public schools.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 7 15
No. of Words: 288 350
No. of Characters: 1443 1500
No. of Different Words: 140 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.12 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.01 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.904 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 108 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 79 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 55 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 44 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 41.143 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 15.95 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.571 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.465 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.846 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.063 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 165, Rule ID: PUBIC_X[1]
Message: Did you mean 'public'?
Suggestion: public
... schools in the state of Calatrava. The pubic schools could be enrolled majorly by ou...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 208, Rule ID: OUT_OF_PLACE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'out-of-state'?
Suggestion: out-of-state
...ic schools could be enrolled majorly by out of state student which would mean that the popul...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 105, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ion of public school, playing fields and recreational facilities funding will be ...
^^
Line 9, column 26, Rule ID: A_LOT_OF_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun assumption seems to be countable; consider using: 'a lot of assumptions'.
Suggestion: a lot of assumptions
...d amenities. In all, the author makes a lot of assumption that are based on on ideas not fully ba...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 61, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: on
...akes a lot of assumption that are based on on ideas not fully backed by qualitative d...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 187, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'strengthened'.
Suggestion: strengthened
...ough the recommendation could have been strengthen by demographic information of the state...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 307, Rule ID: OUT_OF_PLACE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'out-of-state'?
Suggestion: out-of-state
... data on the ratio of international and out of state student population to in state student ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, so, then, thus, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.6327345309 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 9.0 28.8173652695 31% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 55.5748502994 88% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1473.0 2260.96107784 65% => OK
No of words: 288.0 441.139720559 65% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.11458333333 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11953428781 4.56307096286 90% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93932788874 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 142.0 204.123752495 70% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.493055555556 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 459.0 705.55239521 65% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 4.96107784431 0% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 19.7664670659 35% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 41.0 22.8473053892 179% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 100.198985697 57.8364921388 173% => OK
Chars per sentence: 210.428571429 119.503703932 176% => OK
Words per sentence: 41.1428571429 23.324526521 176% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.42857142857 5.70786347227 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.25449101796 133% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0554250545439 0.218282227539 25% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0269488691203 0.0743258471296 36% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0180296160794 0.0701772020484 26% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0317872301961 0.128457276422 25% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0144774658501 0.0628817314937 23% => 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: 23.2 14.3799401198 161% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 29.86 48.3550499002 62% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 7.1628742515 181% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 19.3 12.197005988 158% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.25 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.51 8.32208582834 114% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 98.500998004 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 19.5 12.3882235529 157% => OK
gunning_fog: 18.4 11.1389221557 165% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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
---------------------
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.