Last year, Kensington Academy turned over management of its cafeteria to a private vendor, Swift Nutrition. This company serves low-fat, low-calorie meals that students do not find enjoyable – my son and several of his friends came home yesterday complaining about the lunch options. While the intent of hiring Swift may have been to cause students to eat healthier foods, the plan is just going to cause students to bring their own, less healthy lunches instead of eating cafeteria food. If Swift is not replaced with another vendor, there will be serious health consequences for Kensington students.
The letter begins with an obvious bias. The parent has based the entire argument on the basis of feedback received from their son and his friends. The argument may not be representative of the entire class. Maybe just their son and his friends didn't find the food enjoyable. Such instances of not being able to enjoy the food maybe linked to other reasons. The son may have been reprimanded, just had an unpleasant experience. This harbored anger or frustration might have ruined the food experience.
Another domain where the argument lacks cogency is that the food is described as not enjoyable by some students and not fatty or calorie intensive. Swift Nutrition was hired to provide low fat, low calorie meals. Taste is subjective and such claims may not represent the views of the entire school. Also, the argument mentions that it was a singular event in the past and hasn't been linked to a consistent phenomena which implies that this might have been a temporary issue if exists at all.
The argument also accuses the plan of selecting Swift Nutrition as the vendor to fail as students might be inclined to bring less healthy options for lunch to school. As nutrition requirements may be specific to individuals, healthy food takes different forms and may not be generic to the entire school population. The accusation protracts to claim that their will be serious health consequences as the healthiness of the food hasn't been questioned anywhere in the parent's letter, rather the taste might have led to the dislike. Hence the decision of hiring Swift Nutrition for low-fat, low-calorie diet may still be valid.
Hence, this letter sounds like a rant from parent who is upset that her child is unhappy. Maybe the reason isn't even food but that's what she is told to believe and emotions may have triggered her to make it right by addressing this issue to make their son happy.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
flaws:
two arguments are somehow duplicated.
and need one more argument.
--------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 327 350
No. of Characters: 1536 1500
No. of Different Words: 178 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.252 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.697 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.475 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 97 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 71 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 51 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 33 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.235 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.264 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.529 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.324 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.509 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.086 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 148, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...eceived from their son and his friends. The argument may not be representative of t...
^^^
Line 1, column 245, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...s. Maybe just their son and his friends didnt find the food enjoyable. Such instances...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 374, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: hasn't
...it was a singular event in the past and hasnt been linked to a consistent phenomena w...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 408, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'phenomenon'?
Suggestion: phenomenon
...t and hasnt been linked to a consistent phenomena which implies that this might have been...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 429, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: hasn't
...equences as the healthiness of the food hasnt been questioned anywhere in the parents...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 531, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...he taste might have led to the dislike. Hence the decision of hiring Swift Nutrition ...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 108, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
... her child is unhappy. Maybe the reason isnt even food but thats what she is told to...
^^^^
Line 7, column 127, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: that's
...py. Maybe the reason isnt even food but thats what she is told to believe and emotion...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, if, may, so, still
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 55.5748502994 58% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1570.0 2260.96107784 69% => OK
No of words: 323.0 441.139720559 73% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.86068111455 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23936324884 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5223098513 2.78398813304 91% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.541795665635 0.468620217663 116% => OK
syllable_count: 469.8 705.55239521 67% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 50.8515037391 57.8364921388 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 92.3529411765 119.503703932 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0 23.324526521 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.11764705882 5.70786347227 37% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 8.0 5.25449101796 152% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.134815355229 0.218282227539 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0498935489327 0.0743258471296 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0605700941025 0.0701772020484 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0839677878295 0.128457276422 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0315351789255 0.0628817314937 50% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.0 14.3799401198 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.3550499002 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.91 12.5979740519 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.1 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 98.500998004 73% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 5.5 12.3882235529 44% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.