Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine.
"In 1975 a wildlife census found that there were seven species of amphibians in Xanadu National Park, with abundant number of each species. However, in 2002 only four species of amphibians were observed in the park, and the numbers of each species were drastically reduced. There has been a substantial decline in the numbers of amphibians worldwide, and global pollution of water and air is clearly implicated. The decline of amphibians in Xandu National Park, however, almost certainly has a different cause: in 1975, trout - which are known to eat amphibian eggs - were introduced into the park."
The author is concerned about the decrease in the number of Amphibians worldwide and holds the Global Pollution responsible for it. Further, the author has highlighted a different reason for decline in number of amphibians in Xandu national park. The author says that it is because of the trouts, amphibian eggs eating fishes, there is a decline in amphibian species from 7 in 1975 to only 4 in 2002.
The author says that in 1975 a wildlife census found that there were seven species of amphibians in Xanadu National Park, with an abundant number of each species. However, in 2002 only four species of amphibians were observed in the park, and the numbers of each species were drastically reduced. The season of the year at which the census was conducted in 2002 might be the hibernating period for many species. Therefore, these species might not have been part of the census. Amphibians do not like extreme temperatures. During the cold winter months, most of them will either hibernate in the mud at the bottom of the water or dig down into the ground to hibernate. Some amphibians stow away in cracks in logs or between rocks during the winter. Thus, there is a need to give details of the period of the year at which the census was conducted in both the years.
Secondly, the author says that there has been a substantial decline in the numbers of amphibians worldwide, and global pollution of water and air is clearly implicated. Along with the increase in Pollution, there might be many other reasons affecting the decline in number of amphibians worldwide. Many other factors such as the Wildfire, Deforestation, soil erosion and lack of food might have caused the decline. For instance, due to high temperatures and severe drought the forests in Australia caught bush fire which drastically spread all over the continent. Thus, killed a large number of animals and destroyed their habitat.
The reason for the decline of amphibian species worldwide i.e. the air and water pollution might also be the reason for the decline of amphibians in Xandu national park. Hence the author needs to provide evidence that the reasons are different for the decline of amphibians in the Park.
Further, the author proposes a different reason for the decline of amphibians in Xandu National Park, that it is because of the trouts - which are known to eat amphibian eggs - were introduced into the park. There might be some amount of decline in the number of amphibians due to the "trout", but the author hasn't mentioned when the "trout" was bought into the Park and how fast it multiplied in number. As these factors are important to be known whether the number of trouts in the park really were able to extinguish three amphibian species from the park. As many amphibians lay eggs in large clusters called egg masses and these eggs are too much in number. For example, a frog lays around 4000 eggs at a time. Thus, it becomes very important to know the number of trouts in the park. Also, there might be any other reason as mentioned earlier for the decline of the amphibian species.
The author glosses over various questions that need to be answered like the season of the year in which the survey was conducted, subsidiary reasons causing the decline of amphibians and the number of trouts in the park when they were brought in the park, and their ability to eat a whole lot of eggs laid by the amphibians. If the author mentions these additional evidences then his claims would be more cogent.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-11 | riyarmy | 50 | view |
| 2023-07-20 | Tanmay Shikhare | 66 | view |
| 2023-03-07 | Ashlesha Ahirwadi | 60 | view |
| 2022-08-16 | Shruti Kale | 60 | view |
| 2021-07-14 | Ruffin_ | 62 | view |
- The following appeared in the summary of a study on headaches suffered by the residents of Mentia Salicylates are members of the same chemical family as asprin a medicine used to treat headaches Although many foods are naturally rich in salicylates for th 60
- Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim In developing and supporting your position be sure to address the most compelling reasons and or examples that could be used to challenge your position Critical 16
- Commuters complain that increased rush hour traffic on Blue Highway between the suburbs and the city center has doubled their commuting time The favored proposal of the motorists lobby is to widen the highway adding an additional lane of traffic Opponents 78
- Government officials should rely on their own judgment rather than unquestioningly carry out the will of the people they serve 50
- The following recommendation was made by the president and administrative staff of Grove College a private institution to the college s governing committee We recommend that Grove College preserve its century old tradition of all female education rather t 53
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 27 15
No. of Words: 605 350
No. of Characters: 2825 1500
No. of Different Words: 235 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.96 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.669 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.434 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 202 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 135 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 81 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 64 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.407 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.325 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.556 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.338 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.338 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.13 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 578, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...ad all over the continent. Thus, killed a large number of animals and destroyed their habitat. ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 171, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...e of amphibians in Xandu national park. Hence the author needs to provide evidence th...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 319, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: hasn't
...o the 'trout', but the author hasnt mentioned when the 'trout' wa...
^^^^^
Line 6, column 284, Rule ID: WHOLE_LOT[1]
Message: Use simply 'lot'.
Suggestion: lot
...in the park, and their ability to eat a whole lot of eggs laid by the amphibians. If the ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 325, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ole lot of eggs laid by the amphibians. If the author mentions these additional ev...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, however, if, really, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, for example, for instance, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.6327345309 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 28.8173652695 76% => OK
Preposition: 97.0 55.5748502994 175% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 16.3942115768 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2914.0 2260.96107784 129% => OK
No of words: 604.0 441.139720559 137% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.82450331126 5.12650576532 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.95746018188 4.56307096286 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61468425558 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 241.0 204.123752495 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.399006622517 0.468620217663 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 881.1 705.55239521 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 19.7664670659 137% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.357828053 57.8364921388 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.925925926 119.503703932 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3703703704 23.324526521 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.37037037037 5.70786347227 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 13.0 4.67664670659 278% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0439312067903 0.218282227539 20% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0167721846445 0.0743258471296 23% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0264000717732 0.0701772020484 38% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0320672058391 0.128457276422 25% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0199176109532 0.0628817314937 32% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 14.3799401198 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.3550499002 119% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.97 12.5979740519 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.37 8.32208582834 89% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 98.500998004 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 12.3882235529 73% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.