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.
To revitalise the city of Transopolis, the planning department recommended that residential areas opposite side of the industrial area, where population is declining, should be transformed into another industrial area. The arguments supporting the conclusion is unsubstantiated. The planning department should provide more evidence and the arguments should be evaluated.
First, there is no statistical evidence to support the decline of population in the residential area. The department did not provide any evidence showing the trend of the decline, percentage of the changes, and associated factors that drive people out of the residential area. There is a possibility that the decline is minimal and not statistical significant. On the other hand, the decline could be attributed to the presence of the industrial area opposite of the residential area. There is no information indicating what kind of industry is dominating the city of Transopolis. It could be that factories in the city has created a hazardous environmental conditions that make the neighbouring residential area unsuitable for living. Furthermore, it could plausible that the crime rate in the residential area has elevated, causing residents moving from the area.
Secondly, the argument that the 10-year-old urban renewal program, which converted the substandard housing to an industrial area, could be applied on the residential area is ill-supported. Although the author mentioned the advantages of such transformation, such as lower crime rates and higher property tax revenues, however, these are insufficient to conclude the the same transformation should be made. The department should cite the number of percentage changes for these two advantages, and also to provide more evidence that account more parameters. For example, degree of environmental degradation, health issues, and whether majority of the citizens of Transopolis reject or accept the idea. By accessing planning and reviewing the findings may help citizens and the department make a fair decision of such changes.
Thirdly, one of the argument supporting the idea of urban planning is that some houses and apartments in the existing nearby neighbourhood are available. This argument is unreasonable and insufficient to support the decision. It unclear whether the relocation is acceptable for most residents. The relocation may be costly and create a lot of inconveniences such as longer distance to schools and workplaces. It is also unclear what kind of housing are available and. They can be cheaper but in poor conditions. Also, there may not enough housing available to accommodate all residents in Transopolis. Apart from these information, the department should provide information about the available facilities in the neighbourhood.
To conclude, there are several flaws in the recommendation by the planning department of Transopolis city. The department should provide details about the decline of population in the residential area, suitability of the transformation and acceptance of the planning by the residents. This will help the planning department reassess whether their plan can help revitalise the city.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK. where is 'the decline of population' in the essay topic?
argument 2 -- not OK.
argument 3 -- OK
--------------------
suggested arguments:
1. maybe the program is not the only positive factor.
2. it works for 10 years ago, it may not work for nowadays.
2. it works for this side, it may not work for the opposite side.
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 26 15
No. of Words: 477 350
No. of Characters: 2643 1500
No. of Different Words: 201 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.673 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.541 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.21 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 200 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 176 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 136 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 102 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.346 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.788 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.577 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.291 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.486 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.077 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 363, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...ver, these are insufficient to conclude the the same transformation should be made. The...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 363, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...ver, these are insufficient to conclude the the same transformation should be made. The...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 614, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this information' or 'these informations'?
Suggestion: this information; these informations
...ll residents in Transopolis. Apart from these information, the department should provide informat...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, apart from, for example, kind of, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 11.1786427146 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 55.5748502994 99% => OK
Nominalization: 32.0 16.3942115768 195% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2709.0 2260.96107784 120% => OK
No of words: 477.0 441.139720559 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.67924528302 5.12650576532 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67336384929 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.29192000131 2.78398813304 118% => OK
Unique words: 213.0 204.123752495 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.446540880503 0.468620217663 95% => OK
syllable_count: 855.9 705.55239521 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59920159681 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 19.7664670659 132% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 46.8162718893 57.8364921388 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.192307692 119.503703932 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.3461538462 23.324526521 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.65384615385 5.70786347227 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.20758483034 158% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => 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: 0.23542736638 0.218282227539 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0636799060238 0.0743258471296 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0640185909884 0.0701772020484 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.141101578458 0.128457276422 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0450519769002 0.0628817314937 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 14.3799401198 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.28 48.3550499002 75% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.66 12.5979740519 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.77 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 128.0 98.500998004 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.