The following is a letter to the head of the tourism bureau on the island of Tria.
"Erosion of beach sand along the shores of Tria Island is a serious threat to our island and our tourist industry. In order to stop the erosion, we should charge people for using the beaches. Although this solution may annoy a few tourists in the short term, it will raise money for replenishing the sand. Replenishing the sand, as was done to protect buildings on the nearby island of Batia, will help protect buildings along our shores, thereby reducing these buildings' risk of additional damage from severe storms. And since beaches and buildings in the area will be preserved, Tria's tourist industry will improve over the long term."
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 prompt suggests the proclination of the author to improve the tourist industry of Tria by charging necessary amounts from the tourists. Although a few logical reasoning have been provided by the author, still it requires clarification of some logical flaws that underlie the premises of the argument before coming to any conclusion.
To begin with - the author believed that the erosion caused by the tourists who are travelling there to enjoy. But he is disregarding the other factors. It is true that increase of people will make the island vulnerable to erosion or any further damage, but there is no evidence that only the tourists are causing the damage. Apart from that - there might be other reasons behind the erosion of the island. What if the erosion is actually happening because of some recent inclement weather of that island, may be because of the overall increment of the water level of ocean is actually causing the erosion and in that case there is no hand of the tourists for the erosion.
Even for time being we let that the tourists are causing the erosion by their insincere activites and frolickness. So, regarding this case it seems to be good enough solution to charge the tourists for using the beach. But is it truly the fact as it seems? What if because of the chraging for using the toruists are avoiding the beach. As a result, due to less activity there beach may succumb to loss of hard soil and shortage of certain minerals or bacterias which may help to lessen the erosion. Consquently, the beach might detoriate much faster than before. Also, it is proclaimed in the prompt that - by utilizing the charged money from the tourists the authority will try to rebuild the island and helps to end the erosion of this. But the author pressumptously neglected the very estimable fact that - there is a good chance that the authority might not be able to fetch sufficient amount of money to secure the island from erosion. Rather in worst cases, it might happen that the tourists are not willing to tour the island tourist industry because eof the charging of using the beach. In that scenario, it will be nothing but a disaster to the toruism bureau of the Tria island as they will suffer the island erosion added to the decrease in their customers beacuse of the short time confinements.
Apart from the mentioned assumptions, it is pretty obvious that the author believes that the process that followeed for the replanishment of the sand of Batia island will serve same for that of Tria. But it might not difficult to spot that the author is actually missing several important points; that is to say - the diference of the island in certain parameters - geographic, demographic, soild hardness, contemporary weather and so on. If any of these parameters are not identicl for both tof the island then any extrapolation of one process to another might not serve in due consequence. For example - the weather of Batia islan may be so good that the replenishing the sand is a successful project for the same. However, if the weather for Tria island is much more inclement towards the habitats and people living there compared to that of Batia island - then it will not be a good prospect to imply similar process for both of the island. This discrepency requires a good amount of evidences of both the islands.
So, looking at all the aforementioned facts and critical reasoning, it might be clear enought that - sufficient amount of evidences with proper explanations are required to come to any conclusion and deterring to any of the mentioned questions will not provide necessary platforms upon which a concrete decision can be taken.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 10 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 22 2
No. of Sentences: 24 15
No. of Words: 628 350
No. of Characters: 2976 1500
No. of Different Words: 263 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 5.006 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.739 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.566 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 211 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 161 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 104 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 58 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.167 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.947 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.792 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.306 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.489 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.107 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 942, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Rather,
...oney to secure the island from erosion. Rather in worst cases, it might happen that th...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 949, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'in the worst'.
Suggestion: in the worst
... secure the island from erosion. Rather in worst cases, it might happen that the tourist...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, however, if, look, may, regarding, so, still, then, apart from, for example, as a result, it is true, to begin with, that is to say
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 32.0 19.6327345309 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.9520958084 147% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 11.1786427146 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 25.0 13.6137724551 184% => OK
Pronoun: 43.0 28.8173652695 149% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 84.0 55.5748502994 151% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3042.0 2260.96107784 135% => OK
No of words: 628.0 441.139720559 142% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.84394904459 5.12650576532 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.00598923014 4.56307096286 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6458439914 2.78398813304 95% => OK
Unique words: 269.0 204.123752495 132% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.428343949045 0.468620217663 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 948.6 705.55239521 134% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 71.8278105959 57.8364921388 124% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.75 119.503703932 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.1666666667 23.324526521 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.33333333333 5.70786347227 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.20758483034 158% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.290626471577 0.218282227539 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0892444628156 0.0743258471296 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0697846739908 0.0701772020484 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.147613595368 0.128457276422 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0968236988053 0.0628817314937 154% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 14.3799401198 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 48.3550499002 111% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.09 12.5979740519 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.3 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 134.0 98.500998004 136% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
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.