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.
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The author asseverates that the by cleaning up the river, residents will be able to enjoy their favorite activities which is water sports, and thus should increase the budget allocated to the recreational facilities. However, the argument is not sound and should provide more evidence such as the credibility of the survey, relationship between the clean water and people's willingness to participate in the activity, and finally the reason why the government should allocate more budget into this field.
First of all, the survey result should be more specific to be further coherent. There is a possibility that although the Mason city dwellers generally like football, the survey was conducted among teenagers who prefer water sports instead. Thus, the survey may not be representing the whole group, which would result in a subtle change in recreational facility utilization rates regardless of the budget put into these amenities. If we are gauranteed that this survey truly represents the district's predilection for activities, it would be logical than it is.
Next, water quality and facility usage does not seem correlated in the passage. Even though people's willingness to go into the water might be elevated, it does not necessarily mean that they will participate in the activities. Residents could be pursuing their hobbies in a nearby river that is both clean and cheap compared to the city and will not use the city river regardless of the government's effort to clean it. Nonetheless, if the residents were not using the river for recreation due to water quality, a endeavor to ameliorate the river health might help increase the visitors.
Finally, increased funding could not result in increased visitors. Even if the government provides equipment required for the sports by their enhanced budget, the citizens of this city could be participating in water sports in a weakly basis that most of them are already equipped for their sports. Consequently, the change in facility usage will not change. The author therefore, should elaborate more on the reason that increased budget will lead to the public's interest in the amenities.
In conclusion, the passage fails to corroborate the results of the survey, interrelation between clean water and river usage for sports, the reason why they should mete more money into these facilities.
- Governments should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In deve 75
- Undergraduate students majoring in Business or in the Sciences should not be required to take any courses in the Humanities since those courses won’t benefit their future careers.Write a response to the prompt in which you discuss whether or not you agr 83
- 68.A recent study reported that pet owners have longer, healthier lives on average than do people who own no pets. Specifically, dog owners tend to have a lower incidence of heart disease. In light of these findings, Sherwood Hospital should form a partne 66
- The council of Maple County, concerned about the county's becoming overdeveloped, is debating a proposed measure that would prevent the development of existing farmland in the county. But the council is also concerned that such a restriction, by limi 16
- The increasingly rapid pace of life today causes more problems than it solves.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and suppor 54
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 490, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'districts'' or 'district's'?
Suggestion: districts'; district's
...d that this survey truly represents the districts predilection for activities, it would b...
Line 9, column 388, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'governments'' or 'government's'?
Suggestion: governments'; government's
...ot use the city river regardless of the governments effort to clean it. Nonetheless, if the...
Line 9, column 512, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
...er for recreation due to water quality, a endeavor to ameliorate the river health...
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, finally, first, however, if, may, nonetheless, so, therefore, thus, well, in conclusion, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.9520958084 147% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 55.5748502994 76% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 16.3942115768 55% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1992.0 2260.96107784 88% => OK
No of words: 377.0 441.139720559 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.28381962865 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4064143971 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80238946474 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 204.123752495 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.485411140584 0.468620217663 104% => OK
syllable_count: 621.0 705.55239521 88% => 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: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.0308953206 57.8364921388 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.8 119.503703932 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.1333333333 23.324526521 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.26666666667 5.70786347227 145% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.243133725017 0.218282227539 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0797640315727 0.0743258471296 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0710231966442 0.0701772020484 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.135465014543 0.128457276422 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0478594570414 0.0628817314937 76% => OK
automated_readability_index: 16.0 14.3799401198 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.64 12.5979740519 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.77 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 98.500998004 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 12.3882235529 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.
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: 15 15
No. of Words: 377 350
No. of Characters: 1937 1500
No. of Different Words: 175 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.406 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.138 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.736 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 140 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 99 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 82 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 51 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.133 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.538 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.733 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.34 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.585 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.097 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5