Two years ago the city council voted to prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. They claimed that skateboard users were responsible for litter and vandalism that were keeping other visitors from coming to the plaza. In the past two years, however, there has been only a small increase in the number of visitors to Central Plaza, and litter and vandalism are still problematic. Skateboarding is permitted in Monroe Park, however, and there is no problem with litter or vandalism there. In order to restore Central Plaza to its former glory, then, we recommend that the city lift its prohibition on skateboarding in the plaza
In a letter to the editor, the author concludes that a ban on skateboarding in central plaza should be lifted. In order to support his assertion, the author provides the example of monroe park where skateboarding is allowed, but no problem with litter and vandalism is faced. However, while the conclusion might hold water, it relies on several unfounded assumptions, that if not substantiated, dramatically weaken the persuasiveness of the argument. The author needs to address the following three questions.
First of all, will skateboarders who may come to central plaza behave in a similar manner like the skateboarders in monroe park? It is possible that people who go to monroe park for skateboarding behave in a more civilised manner compared to the people who may visit for for skateboarding in central plaza. Perhaps the same bunch of skateboarders who created ruckus and caused litter two years back might come back. Perhaps monroe park is located at a place that is nearer to office complexes and business centres and thus cater to older people who are less susceptible of causing vandalism and litter, and central plaza might be located near a local college or high school with lots of kids who are more prone to disturbing and creating a ruckus. If either of the above scenario is true, then the vandalism and littering in central plaza may increase, which may further decrease the little growth it has witnessed in the last two years. Thus, the author's conclusion may not hold water.
Second of all, will allowing skateboarding in central plaza increase the number of visitors? Even if we assume that skateboarders will not create any vandalism or littering, people might still not prefer to come to central plaza. Perhaps number of visitors have not increased by much because of lack of activities to do. Maybe the variety of options available for shopping or eating or some other fun activities is limited and may not cater to people's needs. If this is the case, even after assuming that skateboarders will cause zero disturbance, allowing skateboarders may not have any affect at all in increasing the footfall in central plaza might. Thus the author's claim to restore central plaza's glory may not hold.
Third of all, is skateboarding the main reason why people visit monroe park? It is possible that people visit monroe park not because it permits skateboarding, but because it is much cleaner and no vandalism is present. Perhaps, people might just want to enjoy their evenings at a place which provides a nice ambience to hang out with their friends. Perhaps reintroducing skateboarding at central plaza might not create any affect at all. It is possible that new visitors are reluctant to go to central plaza because of its lack of cleanliness and fear of getting vandalised. Thus, the main focus for restoring glory of central plaza may lie in focusing on improving the existing conditions in central plaza. Thus the author's argument of bringing back central plaza's glory may not hold by reintroducing skating.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 7 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 8 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 506 350
No. of Characters: 2488 1500
No. of Different Words: 214 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.743 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.917 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.763 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 181 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 132 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: 22 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.38 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.696 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.343 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.485 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.097 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 71, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a similar manner" with adverb for "similar"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...rs who may come to central plaza behave in a similar manner like the skateboarders in monroe park? ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 268, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: for
...er compared to the people who may visit for for skateboarding in central plaza. Perhaps...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 949, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...nessed in the last two years. Thus, the authors conclusion may not hold water. Secon...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 21, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'allow'
Suggestion: allow
... not hold water. Second of all, will allowing skateboarding in central plaza increase...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 445, Rule ID: TO_NON_BASE[1]
Message: The verb after "to" should be in the base form: 'people'.
Suggestion: people
...ivities is limited and may not cater to peoples needs. If this is the case, even after ...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 589, Rule ID: AFFECT_EFFECT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'effect'?
Suggestion: effect
...allowing skateboarders may not have any affect at all in increasing the footfall in centr...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 654, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...ng the footfall in central plaza might. Thus the authors claim to restore central pl...
^^^^
Line 7, column 425, Rule ID: AFFECT_EFFECT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'effect'?
Suggestion: effect
...g at central plaza might not create any affect at all. It is possible that new visitors a...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 587, Rule ID: MAIN_FOCUS[1]
Message: Use simply 'focus'.
Suggestion: focus
...d fear of getting vandalised. Thus, the main focus for restoring glory of central plaza ma...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 710, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...e existing conditions in central plaza. Thus the authors argument of bringing back c...
^^^^
Line 7, column 719, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...g conditions in central plaza. Thus the authors argument of bringing back central plaza...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, may, second, so, still, then, third, thus, while, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.9520958084 170% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 11.1786427146 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 28.8173652695 73% => OK
Preposition: 69.0 55.5748502994 124% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 16.3942115768 30% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2539.0 2260.96107784 112% => OK
No of words: 506.0 441.139720559 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.01778656126 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.7428307748 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80631367253 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 227.0 204.123752495 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.448616600791 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 777.6 705.55239521 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.4420608821 57.8364921388 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.391304348 119.503703932 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 23.324526521 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.78260869565 5.70786347227 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 11.0 5.25449101796 209% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
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: 0.269752187621 0.218282227539 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0917011918881 0.0743258471296 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0632661079042 0.0701772020484 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.175247955261 0.128457276422 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0497210609833 0.0628817314937 79% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.3550499002 119% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.85 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 98.500998004 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.