"One month ago, all the showerheads in the first three buildings of the Sunnyside Towers
complex were modified to restrict maximum water flow to one-third of what it used to be.
Although actual readings of water usage before and after the adjustment are not yet
available, the change will obviously result in a considerable savings for Sunnyside
Corporation, since the corporation must pay for water each month. Except for a few
complaints about low water pressure, no problems with showers have been reported
since the adjustment. I predict that modifying showerheads to restrict water flow
throughout all twelve buildings in the Sunnyside Towers complex will increase our profits
even more dramatically."
In the letter, it is argued that all the showerheads in the first three buildings of the Sunnyside Towers should be modified to restrict maximum water flow in order to reduce water usage and family’s spending on the water. Although, according to one of the owner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment, there was a few complaints and this proposal indeed realize its initial purpose, some questions should be asked about whether the water can be reduced, the cost of modification and its effect on the potential business if the proposal can increase their profits.
First and foremost, we need to know the precise number of the saved water. We have the collect the number of water usage both before and after the modification to determine whether water usage is decreased instead of simply imaging the results. It is because of the fact that although the water flow come out of the showerheads has been reduced to one-third, people will tend to spend more time taking shower due to the reduced water supply per minute. Thus, the total water usage every bath time may not change at all and one of the purpose’s initial dream that saving water can’t be reached. So more detailed information should be required to evaluate this proposal.
In addition, the second question is the cost of modifying the showerheads. It is obvious that a lot of workers and labors will be hired to install these showerheads which is a great deal of money. Besides, the cost the showerheads also cost a lot. To some extent, the buildings’ water may have to be redesigned to parallel the reduced water flows. For instance, thanks to the reduced water flows, some money can be saved to support these modifications, but if the cost of hiring workers and other things exceed the reduced money, it will be impossible for the proposal to realize the purpose of saving money. More information about the cost of modification should be collected to rate the proposal.
Finally, these changes on water flow may discourage some potential tenants. There may be some people that they hate the reduced water flow during showing because it will reduce the pleasure of taking a shower. While making the modifications, a lot of noise will be made and residents’ life qualities will be greatly reduced. Some residents may feel that they can no longer bear these interferences and move out of these buildings. All of these possibilities will do great harm to the company’s profits.
In a nutshell, while it is understandable that the company tried to save money be restricting the water flows, more questions mentioned above should be answered to find out whether the proposal can actually help the company realize the dream of making more profits.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 20 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 460 350
No. of Characters: 2198 1500
No. of Different Words: 203 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.631 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.778 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.529 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 151 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 111 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 68 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 42 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.211 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 13.383 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.737 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.339 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.55 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.119 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 252, Rule ID: BECAUSE_OF_THE_FACT_THAT[1]
Message: This phrase is redundant. Use simply 'because'.
Suggestion: because
...ad of simply imaging the results. It is because of the fact that although the water flow come out of the...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, besides, but, finally, first, if, may, second, so, third, thus, while, for instance, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 24.0 12.9520958084 185% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 55.5748502994 103% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 16.3942115768 55% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2285.0 2260.96107784 101% => OK
No of words: 460.0 441.139720559 104% => OK
Chars per words: 4.96739130435 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.6311565067 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77121563684 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 206.0 204.123752495 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.447826086957 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 721.8 705.55239521 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 78.3986898528 57.8364921388 136% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.263157895 119.503703932 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.2105263158 23.324526521 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.89473684211 5.70786347227 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.282401914988 0.218282227539 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0974814471453 0.0743258471296 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0904861120894 0.0701772020484 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.174567311448 0.128457276422 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0921719227919 0.0628817314937 147% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.3799401198 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.26 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 98.500998004 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 17.5 12.3882235529 141% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.