The following is a recommendation from the personnel director to the president of Acme Publishing Company.
"Many other companies have recently stated that having their employees take the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course has greatly improved productivity. One graduate of the course was able to read a 500-page report in only two hours; another graduate rose from an assistant manager to vice president of the company in under a year. Obviously, the faster you can read, the more information you can absorb in a single workday. Moreover, Easy Read would cost Acme only $500 per employee—a small price to pay when you consider the benefits. Included in this fee is a three-week seminar in Spruce City and a lifelong subscription to the Easy Read newsletter. Clearly, Acme would benefit greatly by requiring all of our employees to take the Easy Read course."
Argument here states that Acme company should take Easy Read course for the employees. This argument fails to mention several key factors on the basis of which it could be evaluated. To justify this conclusion, author reasons that many companies have taken this course for their employees, and it would be beneficial to the Acme company. However, careful scrutiny of evidence reveals that it provide little justification to author's conclusion. Hence the argument is considered incomplete or unsubstantiated.
First of all, argument readily assumes that many companies have taken this course and has greatly improved the productivity. This is merely and assumption made without much solid ground. Argument does not mentions the details about companies. There can be possibility that number of companies have taken this course is small compared to Acme. And there is also possibility that number of employees in these company are small and have great readers. However, argument would have been much more better if it explicitly stated about companies names, number of employees, and also the progress graph of these employees.
Secondly, author argues here that one graduate who have taken this course can read 500 pages book in 2 hours. This again is a weak analogy used by the argument and it does not demonstrate clear concrete correlation between acme company and this graduate. For instance, if graduate was reading many books during his study time and he/she has already better reading speed and this course have not improved his reading speed. This argument have been lot more convincing to reader if it had given information either by means of detailed analysis of their course taker or by doing general survey on the employees that had take course.
Moreover, argument state that if acme company choose to take this course for their employees that will be very helpful to their company. However careful scrutiny of evidence reveals that it provide little support for author's statement in various critical aspects and raises skeptical questions. For example, what are the number of employees in Acme company?, How reading will help Acme company?, It is affordable to them or not?. Without convincing answer to these questions reader is left with the impression that author's argument is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.
In sum, argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it further, author must provide clear and more concrete information about Speed reading course and its benefits, perhaps by means of survey or detailed analysis of employees that have taken this course. To better asses this argument, argument should also provide the information regarding Acme Company's work and how this course will improve their work.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 445, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...le justification to authors conclusion. Hence the argument is considered incomplete o...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 206, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[3]
Message: The verb 'does' requires base form of the verb: 'mention'
Suggestion: mention
...ut much solid ground. Argument does not mentions the details about companies. There can ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 402, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this company' or 'these companies'?
Suggestion: this company; these companies
...possibility that number of employees in these company are small and have great readers. Howev...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 489, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'better' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: better
... However, argument would have been much more better if it explicitly stated about companies...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 618, Rule ID: HAD_VBP[1]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'taken'.
Suggestion: taken
...eneral survey on the employees that had take course. Moreover, argument state tha...
^^^^
Line 6, column 618, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'taken'.
Suggestion: taken
...eneral survey on the employees that had take course. Moreover, argument state tha...
^^^^
Line 8, column 466, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'questions'' or 'question's'?
Suggestion: questions'; question's
...ot?. Without convincing answer to these questions reader is left with the impression that...
^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'first', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'moreover', 'regarding', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'for example', 'for instance', 'first of all']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.274226804124 0.25644967241 107% => OK
Verbs: 0.160824742268 0.15541462614 103% => OK
Adjectives: 0.080412371134 0.0836205057962 96% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0639175257732 0.0520304965353 123% => OK
Pronouns: 0.039175257732 0.0272364105082 144% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.113402061856 0.125424944231 90% => OK
Participles: 0.0453608247423 0.0416121511921 109% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.57749065097 2.79052419416 92% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0247422680412 0.026700313972 93% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.0680412371134 0.113004496875 60% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0226804123711 0.0255425247493 89% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0164948453608 0.0127820249294 129% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2774.0 2731.13054187 102% => OK
No of words: 443.0 446.07635468 99% => OK
Chars per words: 6.2618510158 6.12365571057 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.58776254615 4.57801047555 100% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.408577878104 0.378187486979 108% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.313769751693 0.287650121315 109% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.205417607223 0.208842608468 98% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.117381489842 0.135150697306 87% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57749065097 2.79052419416 92% => OK
Unique words: 203.0 207.018472906 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.458239277652 0.469332199767 98% => OK
Word variations: 50.5680223033 52.1807786196 97% => OK
How many sentences: 22.0 20.039408867 110% => OK
Sentence length: 20.1363636364 23.2022227129 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.4439305788 57.7814097925 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.090909091 141.986410481 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.1363636364 23.2022227129 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.590909090909 0.724660767414 82% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 3.58251231527 195% => Correct essay format wanted or double check grammar & spelling issues after essay writing.
Readability: 51.5133388057 51.9672348444 99% => OK
Elegance: 1.640625 1.8405768891 89% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.37236547679 0.441005458295 84% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.108189973586 0.135418324435 80% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.101304320791 0.0829849096947 122% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.497179851719 0.58762219726 85% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.120644111993 0.147661913831 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.148428157358 0.193483328276 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0804946818659 0.0970749176394 83% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.348557730023 0.42659136922 82% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0438649154843 0.0774707102158 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.263902912019 0.312017818177 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0568846773054 0.0698173142475 81% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.33743842365 168% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.87684729064 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.82512315271 0% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 13.0 6.46551724138 201% => OK
Negative topic words: 7.0 5.36822660099 130% => OK
Neutral topic words: 0.0 2.82389162562 0% => More neutral topic words wanted.
Total topic words: 20.0 14.657635468 136% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 70.83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.25 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.