Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central Plaza store owners believe that the decrease in their business is due to the number of skateboard users in the plaza. There has also been a dramatic increase in the amount of litter and vandalism throughout the plaza. Thus, we recommend that the city prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. If skateboarding is prohibited here, we predict that business in Central Plaza will return to its previously high levels."
Author is stating that since past 2 years the number of customers has been decreased because of rising number of skateboarders and second problem is that amount of litter as well as vandalism is increasing. Well, author has given limited number of arguments to support his claim.
Central Plaza has monitored the data for 2 years and then they have found that number of shoppers has decreased because of skateboarders. However, Central Plaza should ask their customers if the skateboarders are the reason. They should conduct a survey to determine if there are any other reasons for their declining business. Also, author has not mentioned the age group of these skateboard users, which can be benefial to take a decision against banning them. Although author has mentioned the decreasing customers but, he has not mentioned what kind of customers have stopped coming.
Secondly, author claims that, the amount of litter as well as vandalism is increasing over past 2 years. But, author has not given any reasons for the increasing litter amoung and vandalism. He has overlooked the fact that, only skateboard users cannot be the reason behind it. There are other customers, who are not behaving properly and forgetting their manners, they are throwing garbage anywhere or Breaking public property.
In conclusion, before banning skateboarders, Central Plaza should consider if allocating a certain area for skateboarders would help them to gain their customers back. And for the litter amount and vandalism situation, they should monitor the customers through cctv or spread awareness to not to do such things.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 6 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 5 2
No. of Sentences: 13 15
No. of Words: 259 350
No. of Characters: 1323 1500
No. of Different Words: 135 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.012 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.108 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.649 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 107 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 72 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 50 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 37 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.923 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.993 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.769 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.385 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.587 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.176 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 172, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[3]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
...second problem is that amount of litter as well as vandalism is increasing. Well, ...
^^
Line 5, column 52, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[3]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
...uthor claims that, the amount of litter as well as vandalism is increasing over pa...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, look, second, secondly, so, then, well, in conclusion, kind of, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.6327345309 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 25.0 55.5748502994 45% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 1.0 16.3942115768 6% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1364.0 2260.96107784 60% => OK
No of words: 259.0 441.139720559 59% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.26640926641 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01166760082 4.56307096286 88% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72080534248 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 139.0 204.123752495 68% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.53667953668 0.468620217663 115% => OK
syllable_count: 402.3 705.55239521 57% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 1.0 8.76447105788 11% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
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: 13.0 19.7664670659 66% => 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: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.0615991314 57.8364921388 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.923076923 119.503703932 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.9230769231 23.324526521 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.53846153846 5.70786347227 132% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.237453783793 0.218282227539 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0888551063348 0.0743258471296 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0897928105482 0.0701772020484 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.142893922993 0.128457276422 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0636741756346 0.0628817314937 101% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 14.3799401198 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.3550499002 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.11 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 58.0 98.500998004 59% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
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.