To serve the housing needs of our students, Buckingham College should build a number of new dormitories. Buckingham's enrollment is growing and, based on current trends, will double over the next 50 years, thus making existing dormitory space inadequate. Moreover, the average rent for an apartment in our town has risen in recent years. Consequently, students will find it increasingly difficult to afford off-campus housing. Finally, attractive new dormitories would make prospective students more likely to enroll at Buckingham."
The author has cited some facts and come to the conclusion that the existing dormitory space is inadequate for future prospective students and thus, the college administration should build a number of new dormitories to serve the housing needs of new students. However, the argument is rife with holes and unwarranted assumption and hence, not strong enough to support the preceded conclusion.
First of all, the author's conclusion is based on a questionable assumption that the prospective students will indubitably be willing to look up to the campus dormitories for use. However, it is possible that despite the increased rent charges, students may prefer to live in the apartments off campus. During college life students usually prefer to live independently so, they may opt not to live under a set of rules encompassed by the college dormitories. Also, students may decide to share apartments in order to minimize the burden of increased off-campus housing charge.
Additionally, the author predicts that the campus's enrollment will double over the next fifty years without any substantial evidence. Besides the current trends, many other factors may come into play to determine the campus's enrollment rate over the 50 years. For example, a new campus with better programs and placements may open up closer to the Buckingham college and attract prospective students, or there may be a general downturn in the number of students attending college in the future among many others. Building up new dormitories for an uncertain future requirements does not seem justifiable. Similarly, for all we know, the property value of houses in the town may go down and the average rent for apartment may decrease in the future making those reasonably affordable to the students. They may even end up becoming cheaper than the college dormitories resulting in marked outflow of students. Furthermore, the assertion that attractive new dormitories would make prospective students more likely to enroll at Buckingham seems unfounded. Students may prioritize better courses, academic environment, and qualified faculty over attractive dormitories.
Finally, the author has failed to address the financial and practical aspects entailing the project in the argument. For example, the cost that the college is likely to incur in the establishment and maintenance of new dormitories, the infrastructures to be built and the facilities to be provided to attract the students and so on. A detailed analysis of these aspects may be required to make a sound decision by the college administration.
To recapitulate, it is clear that there are still some unexplored avenues in the argument due to which the conclusion seems feeble. It would be wise to address those issues prior to setting any firm conclusion on the matter.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 19, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...eceded conclusion. First of all, the authors conclusion is based on a questionable a...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 566, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'requirement'?
Suggestion: requirement
...new dormitories for an uncertain future requirements does not seem justifiable. Similarly, f...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'besides', 'finally', 'first', 'furthermore', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'look', 'may', 'similarly', 'so', 'still', 'thus', 'for example', 'first of all']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.245360824742 0.25644967241 96% => OK
Verbs: 0.142268041237 0.15541462614 92% => OK
Adjectives: 0.109278350515 0.0836205057962 131% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0453608247423 0.0520304965353 87% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0123711340206 0.0272364105082 45% => OK
Prepositions: 0.107216494845 0.125424944231 85% => OK
Participles: 0.0350515463918 0.0416121511921 84% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.01935514502 2.79052419416 108% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0494845360825 0.026700313972 185% => Less infinitives wanted.
Particles: 0.0123711340206 0.001811407834 683% => OK
Determiners: 0.123711340206 0.113004496875 109% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0329896907216 0.0255425247493 129% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00412371134021 0.0127820249294 32% => Some subClauses wanted starting by 'Which, Who, What, Whom, Whose.....'
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2813.0 2731.13054187 103% => OK
No of words: 445.0 446.07635468 100% => OK
Chars per words: 6.32134831461 6.12365571057 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.59293186426 4.57801047555 100% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.408988764045 0.378187486979 108% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.334831460674 0.287650121315 116% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.242696629213 0.208842608468 116% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.16404494382 0.135150697306 121% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01935514502 2.79052419416 108% => OK
Unique words: 228.0 207.018472906 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.512359550562 0.469332199767 109% => OK
Word variations: 58.603939608 52.1807786196 112% => OK
How many sentences: 19.0 20.039408867 95% => OK
Sentence length: 23.4210526316 23.2022227129 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.1060811124 57.7814097925 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 148.052631579 141.986410481 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4210526316 23.2022227129 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.842105263158 0.724660767414 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 3.58251231527 56% => OK
Readability: 56.904198699 51.9672348444 110% => OK
Elegance: 1.9381443299 1.8405768891 105% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.478604459714 0.441005458295 109% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.131008207769 0.135418324435 97% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0696257654928 0.0829849096947 84% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.608318562136 0.58762219726 104% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.177007239228 0.147661913831 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.190531612707 0.193483328276 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.10164205558 0.0970749176394 105% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.489978825965 0.42659136922 115% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0765416686121 0.0774707102158 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.311501718622 0.312017818177 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.10460905425 0.0698173142475 150% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.33743842365 96% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.87684729064 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.82512315271 62% => OK
Positive topic words: 8.0 6.46551724138 124% => OK
Negative topic words: 8.0 5.36822660099 149% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 2.82389162562 106% => OK
Total topic words: 19.0 14.657635468 130% => OK
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations to cover all aspects.