The tufted groundhog lives in the coastal wetlands of West Lansburg. Ancient records suggest that the tufted groundhog once numbered in the millions. Since they were declared a wildlife sanctuary in 2004, development along the coastal wetlands has been prohibited. Now local development interests are lobbying for the West Lansburg council to allow an access road to be built along the edge of wetlands. Neighboring Eastern Carpenteria, which had a similar sanctuary, has seen its sea otter population decline since the repeal of its sanctuary status in 1978. In order to preserve the region's biodiversity and ensure a healthy environment, the West Lansburg council should not allow the road to be built.
The argument covers the what, where, why, when, and how. This provides the reader with enough information to visualize the situation at hand but not enough to take a clear stand. Moreover, evaluating the argument requires more facts and figures to be incorporated along with some logical reasoning and emotional reasoning.
A very good premise is to state more about the tufted groundhog, its lifecycle, and its role in wildlife. This will allow the reader to develop an emotional connection with the tufted groundhog thereby strengthening the argument in its favor. It would benefit the writer to include more facts and figures. One possible evidence would be to mention the repeal of the status of which other sanctuaries, apart from eastern carpenteria, resulted in a decline in the wildlife population. In contrast, how did that act benefit the state or the people living there? Providing these figures will easily help the reader take a decision on the argument. This could strengthen or weaken the argument respectively based on the nature of the figures provided.
Another evidence would be to provide logical statements as to how building the road will be beneficial for the state and can compensate for the harm that will be caused to the tufted groundhog. The writer can also oppose the above by mentioning how building the road along the edge of the wetlands is unnecessary and providing alternate strategies in accomplishing the motive of building a road while also saving the precious tufted groundhog. This will allow the reader to think logically with all the information at hand and choose the most optimal solution.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 4 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 5 2
No. of Sentences: 13 15
No. of Words: 268 350
No. of Characters: 1340 1500
No. of Different Words: 141 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.046 4.7
Average Word Length: 5 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.651 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 99 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 74 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 56 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 33 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.615 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.445 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.462 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.347 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.504 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.056 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 3 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, moreover, so, then, while, apart from, as to, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 19.6327345309 36% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 13.6137724551 22% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 28.8173652695 38% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 55.5748502994 63% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1371.0 2260.96107784 61% => OK
No of words: 268.0 441.139720559 61% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.11567164179 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.04607285448 4.56307096286 89% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73658609048 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 204.123752495 71% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.537313432836 0.468620217663 115% => OK
syllable_count: 435.6 705.55239521 62% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.3343811534 57.8364921388 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.461538462 119.503703932 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6153846154 23.324526521 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.53846153846 5.70786347227 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 5.15768463074 58% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.111047361352 0.218282227539 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0359465550362 0.0743258471296 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0448490299806 0.0701772020484 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0702470214289 0.128457276422 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0405585721606 0.0628817314937 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 14.3799401198 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.87 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 98.500998004 73% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.