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 the assumptions and what the implications are if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The argument intedns to convince the city government to spend more money into the cleaning of the river because Mason City Residents will surely benefit, since they are keen on water sports.
The first flaw in this claim is that the author assumes that the datas he referred to are reliable. However, he or she did not precisely state the percentages of the surveys he based this thesis on to claim water sports are the favorite activities of the residents. Indeed, throughout the surveys, these activities can be the first in terms of number of people eager to practicing them, but it could be at very little majority. For instance, if the residents have very diverse and disparate hobby, the water sports could presumably make up for only 30 percent of the answers and still consider to represent the whole majority of the residents.
Furthermore, the proponent of this decision claims that the only few people currently enjoy the riverside of the city, as probably as it may seems, based on the same former data. Nevertheless, a non-negligeable part of the resident community could reasonably like the quiet and calm environment to walk along, enabled by the lack of interest of the water-sports enthusiasts. Thus, cleaning up the river and therefore attracting activities to spaces that used to be relaxing ones is certainly a decision taken at the expenses of current amateurs of the riverside.
According to the argument, thanks to the purification of the river, more people will undoubtedly come practice water-sports. Nonetheless, how can be the author so sure of this claim ? In fact, he or she probably came accross another city that implemented a similar policy with successful results. But it is likely that the situation of Mason City is different from others cities and consequently this cleaning would only be a waste of public money.
In conclusion, in order to better convince the residents, not only should the author build his or her argument with clearly flawed assumptions on the hobbies of the population and expected results, but also support the proposal with actual figures and percentages that make the idea more sound.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Sentence: The argument intedns to convince the city government to spend more money into the cleaning of the river because Mason City Residents will surely benefit, since they are keen on water sports.
Error: intedns Suggestion: intends
Sentence: In fact, he or she probably came accross another city that implemented a similar policy with successful results.
Error: accross Suggestion: across
--------------------
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- not OK
argument 3 -- not OK
--------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 2 2
No. of Sentences: 13 15
No. of Words: 357 350
No. of Characters: 1751 1500
No. of Different Words: 192 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.347 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.905 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.709 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 120 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 93 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 72 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 45 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 27.462 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.061 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.846 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.36 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.619 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.13 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 371, Rule ID: EAGER_TO[1]
Message: With 'eager to', use the base form of the verb: 'practice'.
Suggestion: practice
...t in terms of number of people eager to practicing them, but it could be at very little ma...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 586, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[3]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'consider representing'.
Suggestion: consider representing
...nly 30 percent of the answers and still consider to represent the whole majority of the residents. ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, furthermore, however, if, may, nevertheless, nonetheless, so, still, therefore, thus, for instance, in conclusion, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.6327345309 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 55.5748502994 97% => 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: 1800.0 2260.96107784 80% => OK
No of words: 357.0 441.139720559 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.04201680672 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34677393335 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80457499411 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.557422969188 0.468620217663 119% => OK
syllable_count: 569.7 705.55239521 81% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 19.7664670659 66% => 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: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.7086397517 57.8364921388 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.461538462 119.503703932 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.4615384615 23.324526521 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.8461538462 5.70786347227 208% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 6.88822355289 15% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.192084045685 0.218282227539 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0635916091968 0.0743258471296 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0655240642977 0.0701772020484 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.106826033777 0.128457276422 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0759223272612 0.0628817314937 121% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 14.3799401198 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 48.3550499002 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.27 8.32208582834 111% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 98.500998004 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.