The following appeared in a recommendation from the planning department of the city of Transopolis.
"Ten years ago, as part of a comprehensive urban renewal program, the city of Transopolis adapted for industrial use a large area of severely substandard housing near the freeway. Subsequently, several factories were constructed there, crime rates in the area declined, and property tax revenues for the entire city increased. To further revitalize the city, we should now take similar action in a declining residential area on the opposite side of the city. Since some houses and apartments in existing nearby neighborhoods are currently unoccupied, alternate housing for those displaced by this action will be readily available."
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.
A recommendation from the planning department of the city of Transopolis suggests that they should re-implement the urban renewal program that was implemented in the city ten years ago, and which provided great benefits for the city as a whole. The arguer states that freeing up land, by relocating the people would not be problem. The arguer's recommendation seems convincing when it is read for the first time, although when we mull over the recommendation, alternate possibilities come to light which might undermine the arguer's recommendation.
Firstly, the arguer states that the urban renewal program will provide exactly the same results as it did ten-years ago, and in the process revitalize the city further. The arguer fails to provide evidence in the form of data to support such a claim. What if new factories fail to develop on the newly freed up land? What if the crime rate does not decrease further? What if the property tax collected does not increase? All such questions can be answered if a thorough demographic study is conducted on the city. The arguer bolsters his claim by providing evidence of instances that happened ten years ago. It might be the case that such positive effects do not occur this time around. Hence, without a detailed study, the planning department's recommendation might not pan out as it was supposed to.
Secondly, the arguer's solution to freeing up space for the implementation of urban renewal program is to evict citizens from their homes. The arguer states that the opposite side of the city has many apartments that are unoccupied, owing to which these buildings can be razed to free up space for building new industries. The arguer fails to consider the fact that houses are currently empty, but probably a few years down the line, demand for houses in Transopolis may increase. Additionally, what if the new industries are developed and they need accomodations for their employees? Such a situation would mean that the demand for houses will outnumber the houses available for sale. As a result, house prices will increase and it will upset the normal balance of economics. The planning department's suggestion of razing unoccupied land needs further deliberation before such a plan is set into motion.
Lastly, even if we assume that razing unoccupied apartments is a viable option, how can the arguer be certain that alternate housing will be readily available? What if alternate housing is not available on time and the people evicted from their original homes have to spend their lives on the streets? This might lead to large scale rescentment among the citizens of Transopolis. Moreover, even if we assume that alternate housing is available, what makes the arguer certain that people will agree to move to another location? What if their is opposition by the people against eviction from their homes? This would seriously call into question, the implementation of urban renewal program and undermine the planning department's suggestion.
In sum, it cannot be categorically stated if the planning department's suggestion regarding urban renewal program will be a success. It is due to the various fallacies, that have been stated in the paragraphs above, that seriously question the planning department's plan and undermine their position.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 27 15
No. of Words: 537 350
No. of Characters: 2713 1500
No. of Different Words: 238 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.814 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.052 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.806 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 188 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 150 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 111 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 69 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.889 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.365 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.593 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.279 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.459 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.097 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 337, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'arguers'' or 'arguer's'?
Suggestion: arguers'; arguer's
...ng the people would not be problem. The arguers recommendation seems convincing when it...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 524, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'arguers'' or 'arguer's'?
Suggestion: arguers'; arguer's
...come to light which might undermine the arguers recommendation. Firstly, the arguer ...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 368, 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.
...e crime rate does not decrease further? What if the property tax collected does not ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 15, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'arguers'' or 'arguer's'?
Suggestion: arguers'; arguer's
...as it was supposed to. Secondly, the arguers solution to freeing up space for the im...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 536, Rule ID: THEIR_IS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'there'?
Suggestion: there
...ee to move to another location? What if their is opposition by the people against evi...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, hence, if, lastly, may, moreover, regarding, second, secondly, so, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 12.9520958084 162% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 21.0 13.6137724551 154% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 28.8173652695 139% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 59.0 55.5748502994 106% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 16.3942115768 152% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2770.0 2260.96107784 123% => OK
No of words: 537.0 441.139720559 122% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1582867784 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.81386128306 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85076816013 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 253.0 204.123752495 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.47113594041 0.468620217663 101% => OK
syllable_count: 852.3 705.55239521 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 19.7664670659 137% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 47.6105600902 57.8364921388 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.592592593 119.503703932 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8888888889 23.324526521 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.66666666667 5.70786347227 64% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 14.0 6.88822355289 203% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.23603421217 0.218282227539 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0628344210025 0.0743258471296 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0871122106889 0.0701772020484 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.149282614756 0.128457276422 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0674505628502 0.0628817314937 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 14.3799401198 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.3550499002 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.55 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 135.0 98.500998004 137% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => 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.