In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating and fishing) among their favorite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devotes little of its budget to maintaining riverside recreational facilities. For years there have been complaints from residents about the quality of the river's water and the river's smell. In response, the state has recently announced plans to clean up Mason River. Use of the river for water sports is therefore sure to increase. The city government should for that reason devote more money in this year's budget to riverside recreational facilities.
The writer proposes the increase of the budget allocated by the government for water sports. To support this recommendation the writer believes that the Mason river is rarely used because of the limited amount of budget which the government considered in order to maintain the riverside recreational facilities. Additionally the writer believes that due to the complaints of the residence about the water quality of the river, by cleaning it, utilizing of the river for water sports will increase. These facts, however are logically flawed as they stand because of the following reasons.
First of all, there is not enough evidence about the area that people perform their water sport activities. There might be a lake or another river close to the city center which the residents use for these means. The writer has to consider that increasing the budget for the Mason River as a center of water sport activities will actually increase the number of people utilizing the river or not. To make this statement more convincing, the writer has to provide more information about the preferred areas of these activities.
Secondly, the complains about the smell of the water might not be because of inhibiting water sport activities. dirty water and bad smell will affect the health of the residents. There is no proof that cleaning the river will actually increase watersport activities. The writer has to consider other features of the river such as the water level, the tempreture and the safety of the river which prohibit the residents to do water sports in this river. By bringing evidence about the desired conditions of the river for water sporting, the writer can prove that cleaning the river will enhance these activities there.
Finally because of the lack of evidence that utilizing the river for water sports will go up after cleaning the river, it might be a better idea to invest money on maintaining the river rather than establishing water sport facilities there. The best way is to design a survey where people actually want the government to invest this money. There might be other needs in the city like hospitals or schools which residents prefer the government to consider rather than just free time activities. In summary, the statement could be more convincing by bringing evidence that the river is actually a good option for sport activities taking the river features other than water quality into consideration.
In addition inclination of people to water sport isn't a logic reason to put devote more money on sport activties and there might be other aspects of the city such as education or public transport which people desire to progress more than water sport facilities.
Comments
Essay evaluation 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: 17 15
No. of Words: 448 350
No. of Characters: 2219 1500
No. of Different Words: 176 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.601 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.953 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.528 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 146 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 103 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 84 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 52 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.353 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.343 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.588 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.416 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.612 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.137 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 313, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Additionally,
... the riverside recreational facilities. Additionally the writer believes that due to the com...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 1228, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Dirty
...e of inhibiting water sport activities. dirty water and bad smell will affect the hea...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 1734, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Finally,
...er will enhance these activities there. Finally because of the lack of evidence that ut...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 2436, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[2]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: addition,
...an water quality into consideration. In addition inclination of people to water sport is...
^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 2482, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...on inclination of people to water sport isnt a logic reason to put devote more money...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, finally, first, however, second, secondly, so, as to, in addition, in summary, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.6327345309 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 55.5748502994 103% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2247.0 2260.96107784 99% => OK
No of words: 447.0 441.139720559 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.02684563758 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.59808378696 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58617813444 2.78398813304 93% => OK
Unique words: 180.0 204.123752495 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.402684563758 0.468620217663 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 718.2 705.55239521 102% => 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: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.9668519599 57.8364921388 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.833333333 119.503703932 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.8333333333 23.324526521 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.11111111111 5.70786347227 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 1.0 5.15768463074 19% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.261606924396 0.218282227539 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0959939944788 0.0743258471296 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0481903767045 0.0701772020484 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.261606924396 0.128457276422 204% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0628817314937 0% => 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: 14.7 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.19 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.72 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 98.500998004 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.