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.
The argument asserts that the employees should attend the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course in order to improve their reading skills and provide some reasons that this would be beneficial to company. While this seems convincing on the first glance, there are several significant underlying flaws that raise doubt about the author’s conclusion.
First, the author unfairly assumes that if the employees be able to read faster, they can absorb more information in a single workday while no evidence is offered in order to substantiate the causality. Naturally, when you read a piece of paper a little more faster, you will get information less because fast reading will reduce our concentration on the topic.
Second, the argument wrongly assumes that if employees read a 500-page report in two hours, it would be beneficial to the company, while we are not informed whether the employees need to read such big reports every day or they may sometimes receive that report. We are not informed whether it is economical to pay $500 per employee for per employee because most of them do not need to read any piece of report based on their duties, on the other hand, we do not know how many employees this company has, consider this company has 2000 employ it mean the company has to pay $1,000,000 which is not economical.
In addition, the author asserts that if the employees are interested in attending such course. If not, they will not learn this skill. On the other hand, we are not informed that during the time, employees are learning something new, the company will pay for it and consider that as work hours. If not, a few individuals will be enthusiastic in order to attend this course. The company should hold a survey in order to ask employees if they are interested or not.
In sum, this argument lacks concrete evidence to substantiate that attending the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course will necessarily be beneficial to the company. If the author were to provide more evidence regarding the relationship between fast reading and absorbing information, the number of reports which employees must read in a single workday his argument would be more convincing. The company should hold the survey to get to know if the employee want to learn this skill.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 226, Rule ID: ON_FIRST_GLANCE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'at'?
Suggestion: at
...to company. While this seems convincing on the first glance, there are several sig...
^^
Line 3, column 255, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'faster' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: faster
...when you read a piece of paper a little more faster, you will get information less because ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 544, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'means'?
Suggestion: means
...onsider this company has 2000 employ it mean the company has to pay ,000,000 which i...
^^^^
Line 5, column 571, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...00 employ it mean the company has to pay ,000,000 which is not economical. In a...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, may, regarding, second, so, thus, while, as to, in addition, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 28.8173652695 128% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 40.0 55.5748502994 72% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1890.0 2260.96107784 84% => OK
No of words: 382.0 441.139720559 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.94764397906 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.42095241839 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68319371677 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 204.123752495 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.439790575916 0.468620217663 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 571.5 705.55239521 81% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => 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: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 78.5065966291 57.8364921388 136% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.0 119.503703932 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.2857142857 23.324526521 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.35714285714 5.70786347227 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 6.88822355289 15% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.260105973658 0.218282227539 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0949895281863 0.0743258471296 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.084006582653 0.0701772020484 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.160833122659 0.128457276422 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0623758358885 0.0628817314937 99% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 14.3799401198 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 48.3550499002 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 12.197005988 103% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.73 12.5979740519 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.25 8.32208582834 87% => OK
difficult_words: 55.0 98.500998004 56% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.