The author argues here that a study about the reading preferences of Waymarsh is proven to be wrong since the most checked out book in the public libraries does not fall in that section. Stated in this way, the argument fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated if the study was trustworthy. In support of this argument, the author reasons that the finding about the most frequently checked out book proved the study wrong. However, careful examination of the evidence reveals that it provides little credible justification for the author’s conclusion. Hence, the argument can be considered incomplete or unsubstantiated.
Firstly, the claim assumes that the mere consideration of borrowed out books in the public libraries is sufficient evidence to show the literature preference of the Waymarsh citizens. This is simply an assumption made without much solid ground. Nowadays, for example, people acquire books or literature through many more ways than just the public libraries, such as buying them in local stores, ordering them in an online shop or even downloading them to their e-book. Hence, the argument would have been much more convincing if it explicitly stated that the majority of the citizens get their reading material in the public library, or if it included more sources for reading material.
The argument readily assumes that the most checked out book at the public library has to be in the section of the general preferences of the Waymarsh citizens. This again is a weak and unsupported claim as it does not demonstrate any clear correlation between the most sold book due to a temporary trend and the overall preference of the people. Moreover, the people visiting the public library could be unrepresentative compared to the average citizen of the town/city. To illustrate further, the most checked out book could just be a trend of the people using public libraries like, for instance, Harry Potter used to be. This does not necessarily mean that it represents the overall preference of the people living in Waymarsh. Without convincing answers to these questions, the reader is left with the impression that the claims made by the author are more of an easy solution to prove the prior study wrong rather than providing substantive evidence.
In conclusion, the author’s argument is not persuasive as it stands. To strengthen it further, the author must provide clear evidence, perhaps by including a reliable survey of how the people acquire their reading material and whether the people visiting the public library are representative compared to the citizens living in Waymarsh. Finally, to better asses the argument, it would be necessary to know more information about other books often checked out and if the most checked out book is just caused by a trend or a general preference.
Essay evaluation report
need more arguments, like:
maybe two surveys are in different time. people may move in or move out.
maybe two surveys are by different people....
and more...
-------------------
flaws:
The introduction and conclusion are too long.
-------------------
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: 469 350
No. of Characters: 2340 1500
No. of Different Words: 206 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.654 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.989 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.694 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 178 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 137 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 87 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 47 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.056 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.019 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.556 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.354 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.522 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.084 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, firstly, hence, however, if, moreover, so, then, as to, for example, for instance, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 55.5748502994 115% => OK
Nominalization: 26.0 16.3942115768 159% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2399.0 2260.96107784 106% => OK
No of words: 468.0 441.139720559 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.12606837607 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65116196802 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83199150266 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 213.0 204.123752495 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.455128205128 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 748.8 705.55239521 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.1958137551 57.8364921388 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.277777778 119.503703932 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.0 23.324526521 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.72222222222 5.70786347227 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => 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: 0.140080783278 0.218282227539 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0512566437612 0.0743258471296 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0482062440519 0.0701772020484 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0971345520103 0.128457276422 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0259316135299 0.0628817314937 41% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.7 14.3799401198 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 48.3550499002 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.77 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 110.0 98.500998004 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.