The authors conclude that the city government should invest more money in riverside recreational facilities. For supporting the argument, the authers makesvery interesting reasoning, but it still contains some loopholes which need to be address before moving ahead on above conclusion.
Firstly, for supporting the assertion, the author provides survey data. The survey data does not contains the adequate information about the survey. The survey data depends upon various factors such as sample size of the survey, exact location of the survey, exact timing of the survey, and main objective of the survey. Main objective of a survey plays important role. It decides questions of a survey. If a survey is related to outdoor activities and options provided are unknown to the people then the outcome will be different. If you asked people about favourate mode of transport and provided options such as car, bus, and train, and people selected train that does not mean people to not like to fly. Therefore, survey objectives and related question structure plays important role in the survey. Hence , for accurate information about survey, knowledge related sample size, location, questions is required.
Furthermore, the author also concludes that more money should be invested in the riverside recreational facilities, but he never mentions about finicial condition the state. If the state government do not have ability to fund such expensive projects then state government can not allot money for above project. Before making such comments, the author should evaluate the finicial condition of the state government. Additionally, the author must mention about other priorities of the state governments such as new school building or new hospital building which are necessities for citizens. Thus, information about key factors of the state government such as finicial condition and other priorities is required before evaluating the argument.
In conclusion, after studing the arguments from all the angles, more evidence related to state government current situation and addional information about survey is required to make above argument cogent.
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 329 350
No. of Characters: 1779 1500
No. of Different Words: 160 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.259 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.407 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.663 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 146 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 108 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 85 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 53 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.353 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.007 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.706 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.364 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.571 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.211 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 98, Rule ID: DOES_X_HAS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'contain'? As 'do' is already inflected, the verb cannot also be inflected.
Suggestion: contain
...s survey data. The survey data does not contains the adequate information about the surv...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 98, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[3]
Message: The verb 'does' requires base form of the verb: 'contain'
Suggestion: contain
...s survey data. The survey data does not contains the adequate information about the surv...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 810, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...lays important role in the survey. Hence , for accurate information about survey, ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, furthermore, hence, if, so, still, then, therefore, thus, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 19.6327345309 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 13.6137724551 37% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 7.0 28.8173652695 24% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 55.5748502994 72% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 16.3942115768 134% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1832.0 2260.96107784 81% => OK
No of words: 329.0 441.139720559 75% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.56838905775 5.12650576532 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25891501996 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75706955061 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 204.123752495 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.51367781155 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 573.3 705.55239521 81% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 48.8514448898 57.8364921388 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.764705882 119.503703932 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3529411765 23.324526521 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.29411764706 5.70786347227 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0815255931054 0.218282227539 37% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0344650039051 0.0743258471296 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0284808301093 0.0701772020484 41% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0479219313779 0.128457276422 37% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0309890903876 0.0628817314937 49% => 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: 14.5 14.3799401198 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 48.3550499002 90% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.03 12.5979740519 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.8 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 98.500998004 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 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.