"The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company. "According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than in any other year. And yet the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers about specific Super Screen movies actually increased during the past year. Clearly, the contents of these reviews are not reaching enough of our prospective viewers. Thus, the problem lies not with the quality of our movies but with the public's lack of awareness that movies of good quality are available. Super Screen should therefore allocate a greater share of its budget next year to reaching the public through advertising."
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.
In the Memo, author claimed severals situation to support that Super screen shoud aoolocate a larger shgare of their budgety to reach out countries geneal people by next year. However, writer have not represented proper constructive clearance to agree with his peerspective.
Fisrtly, writer of the memo mentioned that in past years less people attened in the movie hall in comparte to other years. But, here he has not shown any statistical data. It could be possible that tyhere has not taken any statistical information for other years movie goer. Moreover, author stated that the movie reviwer were in large number thyan in past than any other years due to lack of reaching prospective customers. But there might be possible the movie hall environments were good in previous old days but now the movie place is not well decorative and unhealthy. So the people were more and positive reviwes were more in past years than now.
Secondly, author claimed that people are not being reached by their program contents and the problem of movie lover in their hall lies with awareness of their good quality of movie contents not the quality on their movie shows. But, writer have not shown any survey or recognizition to believe that their movie shows are very charming and have good quality of taste. Without haveing reliable we can not rely on that. Moreover , it might be possible that number of movie lover come less there than past year is because no there movie are not making for age level of 20-30. Most of the showing movie for the age of 40-60 years old. But most of the movie customers age is between 20-30.
Thirdly, author claimed that allocatiing budget through advertisements can solve this problem. But, to support that author have not shown any reliable data to believe on that recommendations. It might be possible that allocationg this budget to other as like cinema hall environments and other developments can solve this issues. So, without having any contructive views authority should not use this money to the advirtisements campaign.
In conclusion, author have not drawn cogent views to believe his recommendation. We should not not rely on uncontructive evaluation without having proper statistical information to support that views to solve the issues.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 16 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 21 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 378 350
No. of Characters: 1861 1500
No. of Different Words: 171 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.409 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.923 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.579 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 118 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 83 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 52 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 34 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.9 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.854 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.65 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.324 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.545 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.12 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 213, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ar. However, writer have not represented proper constructive clearance to agree w...
^^
Line 3, column 223, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e possible that tyhere has not taken any statistical information for other years ...
^^
Line 3, column 259, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'years'' or 'year's'?
Suggestion: years'; year's
... any statistical information for other years movie goer. Moreover, author stated th...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 293, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...other years movie goer. Moreover, author stated that the movie reviwer were in la...
^^
Line 3, column 364, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... were in large number thyan in past than any other years due to lack of reaching ...
^^
Line 3, column 506, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... hall environments were good in previous old days but now the movie place is not ...
^^
Line 5, column 426, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...liable we can not rely on that. Moreover , it might be possible that number of mov...
^^
Line 10, column 92, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: not
...o believe his recommendation. We should not not rely on uncontructive evaluation withou...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, moreover, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, well, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 28.8173652695 108% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 55.5748502994 97% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 16.3942115768 43% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1911.0 2260.96107784 85% => OK
No of words: 378.0 441.139720559 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.05555555556 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.40933352052 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64125452218 2.78398813304 95% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 204.123752495 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.470899470899 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 585.0 705.55239521 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 0.0 8.76447105788 0% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.5853869129 57.8364921388 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.55 119.503703932 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.9 23.324526521 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.05 5.70786347227 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 5.25449101796 152% => 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: 0.182879963286 0.218282227539 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.059042223194 0.0743258471296 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0489776947244 0.0701772020484 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0912374152333 0.128457276422 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0695016881583 0.0628817314937 111% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 14.3799401198 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 48.3550499002 128% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.197005988 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.66 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 98.500998004 76% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
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.