The following is a letter from the parent of a private school student to the principal of that school:
Last year, Kensington Academy turned over management of its cafeteria to a private vendor, Swift Nutrition. This company serves low-fat, low-calorie meals that students do not find enjoyable – my son and several of his friends came home yesterday complaining about the lunch options. While the intent of hiring Swift may have been to cause students to eat healthier foods, the plan is just going to cause students to bring their own, less healthy lunches instead of eating cafeteria food. If Swift is not replaced with another vendor, there will be serious health consequences for Kensington students.
The author concludes that if the new private vendor, Swift Nutrition is not replaced with another vendor then, there will be serious health related issues for the students of the Kensington Academy. To justify this the author notes the the cafeteria management in the Kensington academy has been turned over to a new private vendor, Swift Nutrition and the food being served their is not liked by the students and in turn they will start bringing their own, less healthy lunches.This argument is logically unconvincing in several respects.
First, the replacement of the vendor having an affect on the health of the students, is based on the questionable assumption that since the students will bring their own unhealthy lunches as they do not like the low-fat and low-calorie meals provided by Swift Nutrition.It is entirely possible that the parents of the students become aware of the fact that the students are not buying anything from the cafeteria and start packing healthy home cooked lunches for them.It is also not clear in the argument on what proportion of the students of the Academy favor to buy their lunches from the cafeteria or the number of students bringing food from home Hence, the author's generalization is unreliable.
Second the author assumes that the students at the Academy do not the meals provided at the cafeteria enjoyable.To justify this the author provides the example of their son and several of his friends not liking the meal options provided This assumption is unwarranted.It is equally possible that the other students expect for this small group of friends find this meal quite healthy and tasty.The data provided here to justify the inefficiency of the cafeteria is too small and vague such that actual numbers are not even mentioned to empirically justify the data.Hence it is presumptuous to conclude that there would be healthy consequences.
Finally, it can also be argued that the students not liking their lunch options in the cafeteria and the students having healthy problems later on because of that is held together by the flimsy the reason that the students will look for other options outside.There could be possibility that the menu of Swift might expand in the future for more tastier options which the students might like.
In sum, the argument is defective mainly because the that the students do not find the lunch enjoyable at the cafeteria does not support the conclusion that the if the vendor is not replaced there will be severe health problems in the Academy.To strengthen this argument, the author must, at the very least, provide support for the assumptions stated about how many students are presents such that they do not like the food and how many consume alternative unhealthy options.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 16 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 5 2
No. of Sentences: 8 15
No. of Words: 465 350
No. of Characters: 2269 1500
No. of Different Words: 191 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.644 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.88 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.477 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 164 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 128 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 80 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 40 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 58.125 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 24.158 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.875 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.508 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.818 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.183 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 233, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...ademy. To justify this the author notes the the cafeteria management in the Kensington ...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 233, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...ademy. To justify this the author notes the the cafeteria management in the Kensington ...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 376, Rule ID: THEIR_IS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'there'?
Suggestion: there
...ift Nutrition and the food being served their is not liked by the students and in tur...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 480, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: This
...ringing their own, less healthy lunches.This argument is logically unconvincing in s...
^^^^
Line 3, column 48, Rule ID: AFFECT_EFFECT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'effect'?
Suggestion: effect
...the replacement of the vendor having an affect on the health of the students, is based on...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 271, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: It
...lorie meals provided by Swift Nutrition.It is entirely possible that the parents o...
^^
Line 3, column 469, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: It
...ng healthy home cooked lunches for them.It is also not clear in the argument on wh...
^^
Line 3, column 663, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ents bringing food from home Hence, the authors generalization is unreliable. Second...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 113, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: To
...als provided at the cafeteria enjoyable.To justify this the author provides the ex...
^^
Line 5, column 269, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: It
...provided This assumption is unwarranted.It is equally possible that the other stud...
^^
Line 5, column 394, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
... find this meal quite healthy and tasty.The data provided here to justify the ineff...
^^^
Line 5, column 565, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Hence
...ntioned to empirically justify the data.Hence it is presumptuous to conclude that the...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 565, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...ntioned to empirically justify the data.Hence it is presumptuous to conclude that the...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 260, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: There
...nts will look for other options outside.There could be possibility that the menu of S...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 341, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'tastier' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: tastier
...of Swift might expand in the future for more tastier options which the students might like. ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 244, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: To
...e severe health problems in the Academy.To strengthen this argument, the author mu...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, hence, if, look, second, so, then
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 28.8173652695 132% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 52.0 55.5748502994 94% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2311.0 2260.96107784 102% => OK
No of words: 456.0 441.139720559 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06798245614 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62105577807 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62682959587 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 204.123752495 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.429824561404 0.468620217663 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 702.0 705.55239521 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 6.0 19.7664670659 30% => 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: 76.0 22.8473053892 333% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 172.355011531 57.8364921388 298% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 385.166666667 119.503703932 322% => Less chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 76.0 23.324526521 326% => Less words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 9.16666666667 5.70786347227 161% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 16.0 5.25449101796 305% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.249225926773 0.218282227539 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.138752959015 0.0743258471296 187% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0709041249782 0.0701772020484 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.140758388684 0.128457276422 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0802278425074 0.0628817314937 128% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 40.4 14.3799401198 281% => Automated_readability_index is high.
flesch_reading_ease: 2.8 48.3550499002 6% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 14.6 7.1628742515 204% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 31.8 12.197005988 261% => Flesch kincaid grade is high.
coleman_liau_index: 13.31 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.66 8.32208582834 128% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 98.500998004 95% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 12.3882235529 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 32.4 11.1389221557 291% => Gunning_fog is high.
text_standard: 32.0 11.9071856287 269% => The average readability is very high. Good job!
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.