The following memo appeared in the newsletter of the West Meria Public Health Council.
"An innovative treatment has come to our attention that promises to significantly reduce absenteeism in our schools and workplaces. A study reports that in nearby East Meria, where consumption of the plant beneficia is very high, people visit the doctor only once or twice per year for the treatment of colds. Clearly, eating a substantial amount of beneficia can prevent colds. Since colds are the reason most frequently given for absences from school and work, we recommend the daily use of nutritional supplements derived from beneficia. We predict this will dramatically reduce absenteeism in our schools and workplaces."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
In the memo that appeared in the newsletter of the West Meria Public Health Council it is recommended to use supplements derived from certain plant named benefica to reduce absenteeism in school and workplaces in West Meria. The reason given for the recommendation was that in a recent study at near by East Meria people visited doctor only once or twice because they were consuming high amount of benefica. The reason stated seems plausible at first glance but under close inspection it is full of unwarranted assumptions. Three questions must be answered to fully evaluate the recommendations.
To begin with, is the study report a legit source of information? It is possible that the study was conducted by local beneficia producer and the result were skewed to the favor of beneficia. It may also be the case that the sample size of the study was too low (maybe only one or two family) to conclude that beneficia is good for everyone. If the above cases are true then the argument presented in the original newsletter is significantly hampered.
Secondly, even if we assume that the study report is a legit one. Will the result be same for another sample of population? It is possible that the people surveyed in the survey were healthy in the first place without the use of the beneficia plant. It may also be the case that they use another product or plant which is reason for their good health. Perhaps benefica will not be as effective to new population as compared to people of East Maria. Therefore, if the above cases are true then the argument presented in the newsletter that benefica will improve the absenteeism in school or workplace is hindered.
Thirdly, even if we assume that the plant will reduce the frequencies of cold in the people of West Meria, can we be sure that people will not be absent from work place for another reasons? It may be the case that people in East Maria fake cold to be absent as result of which absenteeism may still remain same as before. It is also possible that beneficia may induce some side effects that will create more absenteeism. So, before this recommendation can be implemented study should be done to verify the that there are no side effects and people are not faking cold to be absent from the workplace or school.
In conclusion, the argument as it stands is considerably flawed because of its reliance on several unstated assumptions. If the author of the passage is able to provide more evidence and answer the above three questions in a systematic manner then it will be possible to fully evaluate the recommendation daily usage of the nutritional supplements derived from beneficia.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.0 out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 458 350
No. of Characters: 2157 1500
No. of Different Words: 195 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.626 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.71 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.636 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 147 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 95 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 73 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 46 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.9 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.214 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.7 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.304 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.516 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.069 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 296, Rule ID: NEAR_BY[1]
Message: Did you mean 'nearby'?
Suggestion: nearby
...mendation was that in a recent study at near by East Meria people visited doctor only o...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 341, 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.
...de that beneficia is good for everyone. If the above cases are true then the argum...
^^
Line 9, column 506, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e above cases are true then the argument presented in the newsletter that benefic...
^^
Line 17, column 221, 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 and answer the above three questions in a systematic manner then it will be possible to fully evalu...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, may, second, secondly, so, still, then, therefore, third, thirdly, as to, in conclusion, to begin with, in the first place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 36.0 19.6327345309 183% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 55.5748502994 108% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2214.0 2260.96107784 98% => OK
No of words: 458.0 441.139720559 104% => OK
Chars per words: 4.83406113537 5.12650576532 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62611441266 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71155833026 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.434497816594 0.468620217663 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 720.9 705.55239521 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.6396001125 57.8364921388 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.7 119.503703932 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.9 23.324526521 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.2 5.70786347227 126% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.122905551517 0.218282227539 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0421343817253 0.0743258471296 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0699742504656 0.0701772020484 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0752296326544 0.128457276422 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0627992911051 0.0628817314937 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 14.3799401198 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.03 12.5979740519 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.66 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 98.500998004 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.