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."
In the letter to the head of the tourism bureau on the island of Tria, it is recommended to charge the people who uses the beach in the Tria island and use that raised money to improve the condition of the island. While the suggestion seems plausible at first glance under close inspection it is full of unstated assumptions. Strong pieces of evidence are required to justify those assumptions.
To begin with, strong evidence is required to justify the assumption that the mentioned Tria and Batia islands are comparable. It is possible that the beaches of the Tria island are different compared to beaches of Batia island. It may be the case that sand at the Tria is more susceptible to the erosion as compared to the Batia island. It is also possible that Batia island is situated at the low tide zone as a result of which the erosion can be controlled effectively. So, if the above cases are true then the argument presented by the author in the original letter is significantly weakened.
Secondly, even if we assume that the geographical conditions of both islands are same. Evidence is required to justify that the charging people will generate enough money to start the conservation process of the beaches in Tria island. It may be the case that only few people visit the beaches of the island of Tria and charging them will not raise enough money for the conservation plan. It may also be the case that after charge is placed to visit the beaches of the island there will be huge reduction in the tourists as they do not want to pay just to visit the island. The tourism bureau should conduct a systematic survey to find out the people who will pay to visit the beach then decide on this recommendation.
Thirdly, the evidence is required to justify the claim that Trias's tourist industry will improve over long term by preservation. It is possible that tourism industry will decline in coming years because of the charge that has been placed on the people just for visiting the beach. It is also possible that due to global warming the island may sink in the coming years. It may also be the case that the cost of conservation will be huge and it will be difficult for the industry to recover from that. If the above cases hold water then the argument presented in the original letter is significantly hampered.
In conclusion, the argument as it stands is considerably flawed because of its reliance on several unstated assumptions. If the author of the letter is able to provide the evidence as specified in the above paragraphs in a systematic manner then it will be possible to fully evaluate the recommendation of charging people for visiting the
Comments
Essay evaluation 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: 20 15
No. of Words: 468 350
No. of Characters: 2166 1500
No. of Different Words: 180 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.651 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.628 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.583 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 153 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 104 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 74 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 35 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.4 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.089 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.75 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.332 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.531 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.138 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 215, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “While” 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.
...to improve the condition of the island. While the suggestion seems plausible at first...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 339, 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.
...rosion as compared to the Batia island. It is also possible that Batia island is s...
^^
Line 5, column 474, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[4]
Message: “So , if” 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.
... erosion can be controlled effectively. So, if the above cases are true then the argum...
^^^^^^
Line 13, column 370, 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.
...he island may sink in the coming years. It may also be the case that the cost of c...
^^
Line 13, column 501, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” 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.
... for the industry to recover from that. If the above cases hold water then the arg...
^^
Line 17, column 219, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a systematic manner" with adverb for "systematic"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...ce as specified in the above paragraphs in a systematic manner then it will be possible to fully evalu...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, while, in conclusion, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 31.0 19.6327345309 158% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 28.8173652695 118% => OK
Preposition: 68.0 55.5748502994 122% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2214.0 2260.96107784 98% => OK
No of words: 468.0 441.139720559 106% => OK
Chars per words: 4.73076923077 5.12650576532 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65116196802 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64572024871 2.78398813304 95% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 204.123752495 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.382478632479 0.468620217663 82% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 707.4 705.55239521 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.9313854216 57.8364921388 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.7 119.503703932 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4 23.324526521 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.7 5.70786347227 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.311019400576 0.218282227539 142% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.110937528656 0.0743258471296 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.107999672179 0.0701772020484 154% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.189558699021 0.128457276422 148% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.104516074052 0.0628817314937 166% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 14.3799401198 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.3550499002 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.45 12.5979740519 83% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.24 8.32208582834 87% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 98.500998004 74% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => 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.