The following appeared in a recommendation from the president of Amburg's Chamber of Commerce.
"Last October the city of Belleville installed high-intensity lighting in its central business district, and vandalism there declined within a month. The city of Amburg has recently begun police patrols on bicycles in its business district, but the rate of vandalism there remains constant. We should install high-intensity lighting throughout Amburg, then, because doing so is a more effective way to combat crime. By reducing crime in this way, we can revitalize the declining neighborhoods in our city."
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.
In the argument, the president of Amburg's Chamber of Commerce concluded that by installing high intensity lighting throughout the Ambarg can combat vandalism and by reducing crime in this way, they can revitalize the declining neighborhoods in the city. However, the author supports his conclusion with three unfounded assumptions, if refuted, dramatically weaken the persuasiveness of the argument. Before, evaluating the argument, three pieces of evidence should be collected and analyzed.
Firstly, president assumes that step taken by the city of Belleville will be effective for the city of Amburg to reduce the vandalism. However, this may not be the case. It is possible that most of the casualities in Belleville occure at night, so the installation of high intensity light in the city is effective. On the other hand, in the city of Amburg criminals are active at the day time. Therefore, installation of high intensity light in the city of Amburg will not be a prudent step in reduction of crime. If the case is true, then the author's recommendation will not be efficacious and thus, the conclusion will not hold the water.
Secondly, the author presumes that criminals in the city of Amburg use bicycle, but this may not be the case. It is possible that criminals in Amburg use motorcycle or car for thier criminal activities. It also possible that criminals do not use any kind of vehicle for their popuses. Therefore, patroling on bicycle by the police will not make any difference in vandalism in the city of Amburg. Perhaps, some outsiders of the city are responsible for the existing criminal activities, so the authority can take a step to check the vehicles, which enter into the city from city. If any of the cases is true, then the argument will be seriously undermined.
Finally, the presidents claims that their neighborhoods are declining due to the crime in the city of Amburg without any evidence. However, this may necessarily not be the case. It is possible that there is paucity of job market in the city of Amburg, as a result, the people in the neighbor area of the city are leaving for other city for the search of job. It is also possible that the transportation system to travel to the city is horrible for a long period, and the authority does not take any steps for recovering it, so the neighbors are leaving the area for the hope of a good transportation. If any of the case is true, then the author recommendation to revitalizing the declining of neighborhoods will not be valid.
In conclusion, installing high intensity lighting throughout the city may reduce crime and revitalize the declining neighborhoods in the city; however, the conclusion relies on three unwarranted assumptions, which make the argument specious and untenable. Therefore, the author should provide additional evidence regarding the assumptions and to make the argument cogent and unassilable.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 483 350
No. of Characters: 2367 1500
No. of Different Words: 180 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.688 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.901 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.916 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 162 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 128 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 108 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 77 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.955 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.532 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.864 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.369 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.537 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.099 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 545, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...of crime. If the case is true, then the authors recommendation will not be efficacious ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, firstly, however, if, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, in conclusion, kind of, as a result, 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: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 65.0 55.5748502994 117% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2436.0 2260.96107784 108% => OK
No of words: 483.0 441.139720559 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04347826087 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68799114503 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.00205183117 2.78398813304 108% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 204.123752495 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.399585921325 0.468620217663 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 784.8 705.55239521 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.148870175 57.8364921388 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.727272727 119.503703932 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.9545454545 23.324526521 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.45454545455 5.70786347227 131% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => 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: 0.263909579064 0.218282227539 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0875835628591 0.0743258471296 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0815042593677 0.0701772020484 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.159371460856 0.128457276422 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.052696081995 0.0628817314937 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.95 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.11 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 98.500998004 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.