The Smith Corporation should not be permitted to develop the land that is now part of the Youngtown Wildlife Preserve. This sanctuary is essential to the survival of the 300 bird species that live in our area. Although only a small percentage of the land will be sold to Smith, the proposed development will have disastrous consequences for our area. The company plans to build a small hotel on the land. Although they have promised to ensure the preservation of the sanctuary, there is no way that their plans will do anything but harm the sanctuary. There are no circumstances under which this sale will benefit our community, which relies on tourists who visit.”
A petition was sent to residents of Youngtown by an environmental protection group regarding the issue that Smith corporation should not be permitted to develop a land which is the part of wildlife. The opponents have come to this conclusion based on assumptions that the survival of the species will be endangered. However, before this recommendation can be properly evaluated the petition should answer the following questions.
Firstly, the author of the petition claims that the survival of 300 bird species are essential and it is entirely true in my opinion but what if these 300 bird species can be supplanted to other sanctuary which is in the vicinity of this area? These 300 species can be easily preserved in any other sanctuary. The above point makes the author's claim bogus and based on one-sided unstated assumptions without an understanding. Hence, more evidence is required to support the author's claim.
Additionally, the author prompts giving a small land to build a hotel will have disastrous consequences for their area. There might be a possibility that after building a hotel the valuation of that area increased exponentially and also the corporation as given their word to preserve the sanctuary and a gentle businessman will never go back on his word as his word might have an utmost significance in the society. Hence, without proper evidence and strong viewpoints author's prompt is weakened and more desired viewpoints are needed to evaluate it else the claim remains skeptical.
Further, the author asserts that the sale will not be beneficial for the community. What if the tourist began to visit more than ever to the area after over hearing the sophisticated and well-developed hotel which enlightens the area by its elegant architecture? This will bolster the sale and benefit more to the community. There might be a possibility that because tourist visits the hotel they also went to explore the sanctuary which serves as a cherry on a cake for the community. Hence, the author's assertion is weakened if above scenario happens to occur.
To recapitulate, the above arguments are based on unwarranted and unjustified assumptions. The author needs more empirical evidence to prove his viewpoints without that the prompt remains skeptical. However, if the author is able to answer the above questions then it is viable to prohibit the smith's corporation to develop a land in that area.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 395 350
No. of Characters: 1995 1500
No. of Different Words: 184 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.458 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.051 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.856 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 138 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 114 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 83 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 58 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.944 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.549 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.556 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.32 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.552 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.068 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 498, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...on a cake for the community. Hence, the authors assertion is weakened if above scenario...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 296, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'smiths'' or 'smith's'?
Suggestion: smiths'; smith's
...tions then it is viable to prohibit the smiths corporation to develop a land in that a...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, however, if, regarding, so, then, well, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 55.5748502994 88% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2033.0 2260.96107784 90% => OK
No of words: 395.0 441.139720559 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.14683544304 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45809453852 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92416132181 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 204.123752495 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.46582278481 0.468620217663 99% => OK
syllable_count: 643.5 705.55239521 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.9285308902 57.8364921388 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.944444444 119.503703932 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.9444444444 23.324526521 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.83333333333 5.70786347227 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.258069315406 0.218282227539 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0761758237613 0.0743258471296 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0801269734207 0.0701772020484 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.144930394083 0.128457276422 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0730508288497 0.0628817314937 116% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 14.3799401198 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.59 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.32 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 98.500998004 92% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.