Hospital statistics regarding people who go to the emergency room after roller-skating accidents indicate the need for more protective equipment. Within that group of people, 75 percent of those who had accidents in streets or parking lots had not been wearing any protective clothing (helmets, knee pads, etc.) or any light-reflecting material (clip-on lights, glow-in-the-dark wrist pads, etc.). Clearly, the statistics indicate that by investing in high-quality protective gear and reflective equipment, roller skaters will greatly reduce their risk of being severely injured in an accident.
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The author comes to a conclusion that the risk of being severly injured in an accident while roller-skating can be reduced to a great extent if the roller skaters wear protective clothing and use reflective equipment based on the statistics regarding the people who go to emergency after an accident while roller-skating. Though the argument seems convincing at first glance, upon further contemplation, the argument depends on unwarrented assumptions, if stand invalid, can significatly weaken the argument.
Fistly, the author fallaciously assumes that the roller skaters are not doing any of the dangerous feats, if gone wrong, can severly injure the skater even with the protective gear. People generally do roller skating for the thrill that they derive while doing acrobatics or dangerous manouvers. Even the experts in roller skating tend to fail now and then while doing such precarious feats. And when things do go as planned, the skater can get severly injured even if the he/she wears adequate protective gear. If most of the people are getting injured due to performing this dangerous feats, then the author's conclusion that the severity of accidents reduces if the protective gear does not hold water.
Secondly, the author assumes that the streets and the parking lots are quite safe for rollerskating. However, this assumption may not hold true given the amount of traffic on streets and parking lots nowadays. Day by day, we see traffic increasing rapidly on the streets. There is a possibility that the roller skaters can get severly injured if hit by a passing car even if they were protective gear and reflective material. There may not be any mistake of the roller skater but given the fact that everybody is in a rush to reach their destination and given the chaotic road layouts, it is plausible that the roller skaters can get severly injured and if this turns out to be the cause of severe injuries, then the author's recommendation is significantly weakened.
Finally, the author spuriously assumes that those who are met with injures are actually very proficient in roller skating. However, it is possible that many of the victims are those who are indeed getting started with roller skating. When people are learning new sports it is very common for them to sustain severe injures while they are in their initial stages of learning it, especially in those sports which involve travelling at great speeds with less control. If this scenario has merit, then the author's claim that the severity of the injures can be reduced only by wearing protective gear and reflective material will not stand true.
In conclusion, the argument, as it stands, is unpersuasive as it relies on a series of unwarrented assumptions. One can better evaluate the argument if the author addresses the above unstated assumptions while recommeding the use of protective gear and reflective material.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 4 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 13 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 476 350
No. of Characters: 2384 1500
No. of Different Words: 216 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.671 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.008 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.702 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 181 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 138 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 82 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 54 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.444 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.473 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.944 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.344 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.57 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.127 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 470, Rule ID: DT_PRP[1]
Message: Possible typo. Did you mean 'the' or 'he'?
Suggestion: the; he
... skater can get severly injured even if the he/she wears adequate protective gear. If ...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 604, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...rforming this dangerous feats, then the authors conclusion that the severity of acciden...
^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 718, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... the cause of severe injuries, then the authors recommendation is significantly weakene...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, finally, first, however, if, may, regarding, second, secondly, then, while, in conclusion, to a great extent
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 55.5748502994 83% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2443.0 2260.96107784 108% => OK
No of words: 475.0 441.139720559 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.14315789474 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.66845742379 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77338678122 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 221.0 204.123752495 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.465263157895 0.468620217663 99% => OK
syllable_count: 757.8 705.55239521 107% => 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: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 73.1063828258 57.8364921388 126% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.722222222 119.503703932 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.3888888889 23.324526521 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.83333333333 5.70786347227 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.192399500909 0.218282227539 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0665392540835 0.0743258471296 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0657917801664 0.0701772020484 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111756194619 0.128457276422 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.067408031665 0.0628817314937 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 14.3799401198 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 48.3550499002 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.83 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.15 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 98.500998004 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 12.3882235529 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.