27 The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a local newspaper 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 lob

Essay topics:

27. The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a local newspaper.

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. But last year's addition of a lane to the nearby Green Highway was followed by a worsening of traffic jams on it. A better alternative is to add a bicycle lane to Blue Highway. Many area residents are keen bicyclists. A bicycle lane would encourage them to use bicycles to commute, and so would reduce rush-hour traffic rather than fostering an increase.

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 letter to the editor suggests that adding a bicycle lane to Blue Highway would be a good solution to reduce traffic jam and commuting time for the community. However, the argument is not quite sound because it lacks of evidences to support the idea suggested.

According to the letter, there are two proposals suggested to solve the problem: widen the highway with additional lane and adding the bicycle lane. The writer says that widening Blue Highway would not be helpful since Green Highway, which has been added a new lane, actually worsen the traffic jams. It assumed that two Highways are on the same situations, and share the same conditions over all. If not, the result of Blue Highway adding a new lane would not be the same with one of Green Highway. Without any specific details of Green Highway, it cannot assume that the solution suggested would not be helpful to decrease the traffic.

On top of that, it should have more specific information to support the alternative proposal adding a bicycle lane to the highway. How many people are willing to participate to commute by bicycle? Even though many residents like to ride a bicycle, it does not mean they are willing to use it to commute since using bicycle usually takes longer than using a car. Moreover, bicyclists also need to be educated to ride a bicycle on the highway since highway is the place vehicles drive very fast.

So far, it suggested that changing the highway would solve the problem of traffic jam during rush-hours. However, the traffic itself might have fundamental problems. For instance, there are too many lights on the high way, there are too many accidents on the highway, or there is not much public transportation from suburban to the city. Unless it finds out the fundamental problem on the highway, any proposals might not be useful solutions that ease the highway.

The letter presents the ideas to reduce the traffic jam during rush-hours, and commuting time: adding a new lane for vehicles or bicycles. The first proposal was discarded because it did not succeed in Green Highway. But there is no evidence to both highways share the same problem and condition. The idea of adding a new lane is not reliable because it does not guarantee that people use more bicycles. Over all, it only gives a few superficial solutions without concerning of any fundamental problems that cause the traffic jams. Therefore, the arguments need more specific information regarding Blue Highway before making decisions.

Votes
Average: 8.6 (17 votes)
Essay Categories

Comments

Argument 1 -- OK

Argument 2 -- OK

Argument 3 -- OK

flaws:
Don't need to reiterate the reasons in the conclusion.

Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 5.0 out of 6
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 423 350
No. of Characters: 2032 1500
No. of Different Words: 184 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.535 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.804 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.455 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 150 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 119 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 66 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 38 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.143 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.128 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.524 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.339 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.543 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.077 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5