“In order to alleviate the serious unemployment problem in our town, we should encourage Autotech to build its automobile manufacturing plant in our area. The Hillview landfill, which has been undeveloped for decades, is a perfect site for this plant. The building and staffing of this plant will put to work thousands of Hillview residents left unemployed after Computech computer software programming company abandoned its national facility last year. I am asking the City Council to authorize a large campaign to attract the company and offer significant tax incentives to make our town attractive to this giant of car manufacturing.”
The argument states that the Hillview landfills is facing a serious unemployment problem as the Computech computer software programming company abandoned them. Also the town looks underdeveloped for decades. So they need to work on that to attract Autotech to build its automobile manufacturing plant in their town to employ thousands of residents. So the author is asking City Council to authorise a large campaign to attract the company and offer significant tax incentives to make the town attractive to this car manufacturing company. The argument is a bit poor in its proof and lacks certain evidences to reach to the conclusion.
Firstly, the argument states that last year Computech computer software programming company abandoned them and left their residents unemployed. Here the reason of their abandonment is not stated here. The company's leaving is very abrupt and it doesn't make any sense to leave all the resident unemployed suddenly. So they should ask the company of their sudden leaving. Also the possible reason of the company's leaving is employees poor work behavior as they are not interested it. The interest of employee is also not stated. So, the argument weaks there as well.
Secondly, the City Council is on a mission to develop the town to attract the Automobile company. But the residents here who are unemployed are not even asked what they want to do. If they want to join this company or not. As mentioned in above paragraph, the employee's interest is not addressed in argument. So it is not wise to jump to conclusion to attract Autotech company before surveying the resident. Also the town looks underdeveloped but its evidence isn't given as again resident's view isn;t portrayed here. So again the arguments weaks here as well.
The possible solution to make this argument more strong by adding proof and evidences. The survey of the residents should be done in order to reach the conclusion of attracting car manufacturing company. The opinions of residents in regards to development of the town should be added as for one person it may seem the town is underdeveloped but for others ut may not. So it is important to get their opinions or votes. Lastly, the author should ask the Computech company their reason of leaving so that they can work better on their mistakes and not make the same mistake again.
Hence, the argument by the author has poor and weak statements as it lacks evidences and statistics. The argument doesn't potray the resident's interest, opinion and their point of view. Addition of that will make the argument more strong.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 8 2
No. of Sentences: 27 15
No. of Words: 436 350
No. of Characters: 2114 1500
No. of Different Words: 181 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.57 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.849 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.739 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 148 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 119 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 89 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 55 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 16.148 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.846 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.288 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.467 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.072 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 161, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...are programming company abandoned them. Also the town looks underdeveloped for decad...
^^^^
Line 3, column 245, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... companys leaving is very abrupt and it doesnt make any sense to leave all the residen...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 370, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...sk the company of their sudden leaving. Also the possible reason of the companys lea...
^^^^
Line 5, column 409, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
... company before surveying the resident. Also the town looks underdeveloped but its e...
^^^^
Line 5, column 461, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...n looks underdeveloped but its evidence isnt given as again residents view isn;t por...
^^^^
Line 7, column 205, 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.
...f attracting car manufacturing company. The opinions of residents in regards to dev...
^^^
Line 7, column 231, Rule ID: IN_REGARD_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'regarding' or 'with regard to'.
Suggestion: regarding; with regard to
...ring company. The opinions of residents in regards to development of the town should be added...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 115, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... evidences and statistics. The argument doesnt potray the residents interest, opinion ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, if, lastly, look, may, second, secondly, so, well, as for
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 55.5748502994 85% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2164.0 2260.96107784 96% => OK
No of words: 432.0 441.139720559 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.00925925926 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55901411391 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75605705313 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 190.0 204.123752495 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.439814814815 0.468620217663 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 671.4 705.55239521 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 4.96107784431 0% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.76447105788 160% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 19.7664670659 137% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.8473053892 70% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 42.4327435232 57.8364921388 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 80.1481481481 119.503703932 67% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.0 23.324526521 69% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.37037037037 5.70786347227 59% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 5.25449101796 152% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.139475745722 0.218282227539 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0388584437079 0.0743258471296 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.052046424493 0.0701772020484 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0859616373851 0.128457276422 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0817555255554 0.0628817314937 130% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.2 14.3799401198 71% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 48.3550499002 114% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.48 12.5979740519 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.43 8.32208582834 89% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 98.500998004 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.1389221557 75% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => 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.