The advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company recommends for his business to spend more money for informing the public about their films thorugh advertising. He argues that this will lead to an increase in viewers of Super Screen-produced movies, because in the preceding year the ratings from movie reviewers for Super Screen films increased while viewer numbers dropped to an all-time low. The advertising director makes a few unstated assumptions in his reasoning. Therfore, a few questions need to be answered before his plan can be evaluated. Three of these questions and how the answers to them influence the director's argument will be discussed below.
The first question that needs to be answered is in which theaters the movies from Super Screen are presented? Or to put it differently, are the movies still presented in the same theaters as in the years before? If the answer to this question is yes, then it is advisable to invest more money in advertising the movies, since availability has not changed. On the contrary, if the question's answer is no, the changes in availability of Super Screen films should be investigated first. It could well be, that the drop in viewers is actually a consequence of them not being able to attend the film due to a lack of theatres showing the film.
The second question is whether the mixture of reviewers is the same as in the years before? It could well be that the genre of Super Screen's films has changed, such that it is now only appealing to a smaller audience and is also rated by different reviewers. This would, for example, be the case if Super Screen only produced action films before, which are accesible to a larger audience and now merely produces avantgadistic films only appealing to a small amount of the population. This change in style would also have led to a change in the composition of reviewers, because it is now mostly viewed by people having a very specialised taste in films. Often those people tend to give better evaluations for those films as they know what they can expect and are already very familiar with their corresponding film genre. This would explain why viewer numbers have dropped while reviews have gotten better.
The third question that should be answered before the argument could be evaluated is how this year was different in relation to preceding years? Was the weather different? Are people generally attending less films? Answering these questions can help evaluate the argument, since often sunny weather conditions lead to a drop in film attendance, since people want to spend their free time outside in this case.
Should the advertising director answer the above questions, his argument could be evaluated more accurately. Depending on the answers to these questions a greater expenditure for advertisment should be considered, the accessibility should be enhanced, or the film genre should be changed to reach a larger audience.
Essay evaluation report
Sentence: The advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company recommends for his business to spend more money for informing the public about their films thorugh advertising.
Error: thorugh Suggestion: though
Sentence: This would, for example, be the case if Super Screen only produced action films before, which are accesible to a larger audience and now merely produces avantgadistic films only appealing to a small amount of the population.
Error: avantgadistic Suggestion: advantages
Error: accesible Suggestion: accessible
Sentence: This change in style would also have led to a change in the composition of reviewers, because it is now mostly viewed by people having a very specialised taste in films.
Error: specialised Suggestion: No alternate word
Sentence: Depending on the answers to these questions a greater expenditure for advertisment should be considered, the accessibility should be enhanced, or the film genre should be changed to reach a larger audience.
Error: advertisment Suggestion: advertisement
--------------------
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/following-taken-me…
----------------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 493 350
No. of Characters: 2425 1500
No. of Different Words: 217 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.712 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.919 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.681 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 172 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 124 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 95 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 61 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.409 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.413 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.545 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.295 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.508 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.109 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 640, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'directors'' or 'director's'?
Suggestion: directors'; director's
...d how the answers to them influence the directors argument will be discussed below. Th...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 204, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun films is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...fferent? Are people generally attending less films? Answering these questions can he...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, first, if, second, so, still, then, third, well, while, for example, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 33.0 19.6327345309 168% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.9520958084 147% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 36.0 28.8173652695 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 66.0 55.5748502994 119% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2478.0 2260.96107784 110% => OK
No of words: 493.0 441.139720559 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.02636916836 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71206996034 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74507922068 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 229.0 204.123752495 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.464503042596 0.468620217663 99% => OK
syllable_count: 761.4 705.55239521 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.1035276578 57.8364921388 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.636363636 119.503703932 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4090909091 23.324526521 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.54545454545 5.70786347227 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => 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: 0.188571285246 0.218282227539 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0660645984548 0.0743258471296 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.07762412064 0.0701772020484 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.116652999357 0.128457276422 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0808119735795 0.0628817314937 129% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 14.3799401198 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.3550499002 119% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.19 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.03 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 98.500998004 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.