The vice president of human resources at Climpson Industries recommends that installing a new software to restrict employees' internet use on work computers will prevent the employees from wasting working hours, foster better work ethics and also improve the overall profits of the company. However, this recommendation although it may seem very persuasive leaves remove for ambiguity. For this suggestion to be more explicit, three assumptions must be considered.
To begin, restricting the internet on the work computers of employees may not necessarily prevent them from wasting work time. What if these employees find our recreational activities to entertain themselves like playing card games, Gossiping in the tea room or playing with their smartphones.
Also, studies have proven that rest is an essential part to work productivity and is greatly advised. Thus, it can be inferred that the installation of the software to restrict internet on the employees' computers would not necessarily improve productivity and save time during working hours.
Secondly, the vice president of human resources assumes that by restricting internet use and punishing offenders, work productivity and work ethics would improve. However, this may have a negative impact on the trust the employees have in the company and also create a hostile work environment. The employees may also find a way to bypass these restrictions with the use of VPN's to continue their entertainment as way to repudiate authority. All of these would instead reduce work productivity and may lead to loss of employees thus strongly weakening the recommendation by the vice president.
Finally, If the recommendation is true and work ethics and productivity is improved, installing the software and running it daily on all the computers in the company would be costly to maintain and the benefits of this system may necessary outweigh the cost of the system. It may instead be an unnecessary cost to the company's budget, Hence causing the suggestion of the vice president to not hold water.
In conclusion, as it is, the argument is relatively flawed and leaves remove for ambiguity. However, if the above stated assumptions are put into consideration and more evidence is produced to strengthen the recommendation, then it may be properly evaluated and more persuasive.
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 5 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 15 15
No. of Words: 367 350
No. of Characters: 1931 1500
No. of Different Words: 175 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.377 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.262 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.017 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 143 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 122 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 93 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 68 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.467 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.444 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.933 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.36 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.643 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.069 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 2, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...m or playing with their smartphones. Also studies have proven that rest is an ess...
^^^^
Line 6, column 164, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...uctivity and work ethics would improve. However this may have a negative impact on the ...
^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 339, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...employees may also find a way to bypass this restrictions with the use of VPNs to co...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, hence, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, thus, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 13.6137724551 29% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 28.8173652695 76% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 55.5748502994 79% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1951.0 2260.96107784 86% => OK
No of words: 362.0 441.139720559 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.38950276243 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.36191444098 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.087672505 2.78398813304 111% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.483425414365 0.468620217663 103% => OK
syllable_count: 602.1 705.55239521 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => 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: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.1254244614 57.8364921388 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.066666667 119.503703932 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.1333333333 23.324526521 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.8 5.70786347227 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => 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: 0.258608024721 0.218282227539 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0897438813031 0.0743258471296 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0788220068282 0.0701772020484 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.133803963641 0.128457276422 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0778759337968 0.0628817314937 124% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 14.3799401198 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.3550499002 80% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.28 12.5979740519 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.93 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 98.500998004 95% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.