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, to improve overall productivity, Acme should require all of our employees to take the Easy Read course."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The personnel director recommends that the Acme Publishing Company mandate its employees to take Easy Read course to improve the productivity of its employees. This recommendation is based on the reported improved productivity by many other companies, the capability of one of the graduates of the course to read a 500-page report in just two hours and the promotion of another graduate. However, before the recommendation can be properly evaluated, on need answers to the followng questions.
Firstly, how authentic are the claims made by the other companies that the productivity of their employees improved after taking the course? The director fallaciously assumes that assertions made by other companies are true without showing any sign of cynicism. However, this may not be the case. There is a possibility that the course provider, in order to lure potential customers, spuriously showcases that the productivity of the employees improve drastically even if it is not the case. If this happens to be true, the director's prediction that productivity improves after taking the course will fall flat on its face.
Secondly, is the performance of one graduate sufficient to prove the worth of the course? Is promotion of one graduate sufficient to bolster the director's rationale? The anwser is definitely no. Even if one the course is actually subliminal at its best, there will be a couple of people who show drastic improvement in thier productivity. This enhanced productivity should be imputed to the intrinsic capabilities of the person which has not been unraveled due to various reasons or a promotion that would have been given to the person even if the person did not take the course as it has been long due. In order to understand the worthiness of a course, the course provider should actually show proven consistent record of the enhanced productivity of its graduates over a period of time and in substantial numbers. If the answers to the above questions show that there is no correlation between the course and the productivity, the author's argument does not hold water.
Finally, is it economical for the company to invest 500 dollars in each of its employees? The author did not mention the size of the company. It is possible that there are quite a large number of personnel working in the company and aggregated cost of the course would outweigh the benefits of the course. If this is the case, then the director's recommendation would prove to be a curse to the company than benediction.
Therefore, the argument, as it stands, is unpersuasive as it does include any information that addresses any of the questions posed above. One can better evaluate the recommendation and its consequences if the director can provide detailed answers to the above question so that there is no room for any ambiguity.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 5 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 10 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 467 350
No. of Characters: 2322 1500
No. of Different Words: 205 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.649 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.972 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.942 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 168 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 134 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 102 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 72 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.35 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.865 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.7 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.335 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.547 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.091 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 525, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'directors'' or 'director's'?
Suggestion: directors'; director's
...e case. If this happens to be true, the directors prediction that productivity improves a...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 146, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'directors'' or 'director's'?
Suggestion: directors'; director's
... one graduate sufficient to bolster the directors rationale? The anwser is definitely no....
^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 775, Rule ID: PERIOD_OF_TIME[1]
Message: Use simply 'period'.
Suggestion: period
...ed productivity of its graduates over a period of time and in substantial numbers. If the answ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 935, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...en the course and the productivity, the authors argument does not hold water. Fina...
^^^^^^^
Line 11, column 179, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...ny. It is possible that there are quite a large number of personnel working in the company and ag...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 11, column 337, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'directors'' or 'director's'?
Suggestion: directors'; director's
...e course. If this is the case, then the directors recommendation would prove to be a curs...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, finally, first, firstly, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, therefore
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 63.0 55.5748502994 113% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2382.0 2260.96107784 105% => OK
No of words: 467.0 441.139720559 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.10064239829 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64867537961 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99966296269 2.78398813304 108% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 204.123752495 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.453961456103 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 763.2 705.55239521 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => 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: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.1692623858 57.8364921388 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.428571429 119.503703932 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2380952381 23.324526521 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.28571428571 5.70786347227 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.330699396868 0.218282227539 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0925835886337 0.0743258471296 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0990042072838 0.0701772020484 141% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.183333238484 0.128457276422 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.111705028755 0.0628817314937 178% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 14.3799401198 95% => OK
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: 12.6 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.24 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 98.500998004 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => 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.