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.
The following argument draws conclusion that "we should install high-intensity lighting throughout Amburg, then, because doing so is a more effective way to combat crime." While this may be true, but in order to completely evaluate this argument, we need more evidence. This essay tries to explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
Firstly, the author claims that vandalism in city of Belleville declined within a month after installed high-intensity lighting in its central business district. Whether this declining remain stable in long time. It is possible that, the declination was temporary (Because the vandals are not familiar with new system and vandalism decrease until they familiarize.), and after one month, vandalism get back. If we had evidence that vandalism decreased just temporary, it would weaken the argument.
Secondly, the argument state that "The city of Amburg has recently begun police patrols on bicycles in its business district, but the rate of vandalism there remains constant." It is possible that vandalism would increase in the absence of police patrols on bicycles in the business district. The argument would have been strengthening if had evidence that vandalism would not increase in the absence of the police patrols.
Finally, the argument concludes that "we should install high-intensity lighting throughout Amburg, then, because doing so is a more effective way to combat crime." The city of Amburg and Belleville maybe different in a lot of terms. For instance, it is possible that in one city, objection and in another one psychology problem were the cause of vandalism. If we had evidence that two cities are exactly similar, that would strengthen the argument.
In summary, we need more evidence to completely understanding of strength and weakness of the argument. Evidences, such as similarity of the two cities, rate of vandalism in the absence of police patrols in the city of amburg and rate of vandalism in the city of Belleville after installed high-intensity lighting for long time period, all are needed to assess the argument.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 162, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Whether” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...hting in its central business district. Whether this declining remain stable in long ti...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...porary, it would weaken the argument. Secondly, the argument state that '...
^^
Line 3, column 356, Rule ID: HAD_VBP[1]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'evidenced'.
Suggestion: evidenced
...nt would have been strengthening if had evidence that vandalism would not increase in th...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, firstly, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, while, for instance, in summary, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.6327345309 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 55.5748502994 85% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 16.3942115768 134% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1806.0 2260.96107784 80% => OK
No of words: 334.0 441.139720559 76% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.40718562874 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27500489853 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96307973477 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 154.0 204.123752495 75% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.461077844311 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 568.8 705.55239521 81% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 4.96107784431 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 19.7664670659 66% => 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: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 81.8599612414 57.8364921388 142% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.923076923 119.503703932 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.6923076923 23.324526521 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.23076923077 5.70786347227 144% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.340027221368 0.218282227539 156% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.124955784169 0.0743258471296 168% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.138794767993 0.0701772020484 198% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.202103551063 0.128457276422 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0519235731174 0.0628817314937 83% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.9 14.3799401198 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.3550499002 78% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.39 12.5979740519 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.33 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 98.500998004 74% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.