"Many other companies have recently stated that having their employees take the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course has greatly improved productivity. One graduate of the course was able to read a five-hundred-page report in only two hours; another graduate rose from an assistant manager to vice president of the company in under a year. Obviously, the faster you can read, the more information you can absorb in a single workday. Moreover, Easy Read costs only $500 per employee - a small price to pay when you consider the benefits to Acme. Included in this fee is a three-week seminar in Spruce City and a lifelong subscription to the Easy Read newsletter. Clearly, Acme would benefit greatly by requiring all of our employees to take the Easy Read course."
First of all, the argument readily assumes that Acme- speed reading course, enhances the profit of the organization based on claims of the several companies. This is merely an argument without much solid background. For example, several companies might be 5 out of 10 or 66 out of 100. Hence, without any strong statistical data company could not correct postule the productivity of the firm. Furthermore, argument mention that one graduate read swiftly about 500 page reports per 2 hours; but, it might be possible that individual already avid reader and due to that interest he developed that fantastic speed.
Second, the argument claims that one individual got a higher position from assistant manager to vice president in one year because of this course. This is again weak and unsupported claim as the argument does not demonstrate any critical factors. Likewise, what is background of that graduate?, how many years of the experience in that field? It might be possible he became president because of his unique skillset or he had already long experience that's why he hot top position in company.
Therefore, we cannot direct assumes that there is correlation between organization sucess and fast reading english course.
Thirdly, arguments claims that, $500 per employee is nominal fees as compare to its benefits. Here, author presumes that every employee works in same organization in upcoming year; but, this case would not be possible. Someone left the job at midway then it's training cost would not be justify and company lose the money. Moving further, author believes that more rapidly you read more information you get. However, it is not possible in every case. Sometime, is it very difficult to read complex data and it might be take a time. Hence, it is weak argument. However, careful scrutiny of the all evidence reveals little credible support for author's arguments with respect to several critical factors and raises several skeptical questions. If author provide broad support for their claims then it more plausible.
To conclude, The author argument unpersuasive stands. To bolster it, author must provide concrete evidence. It could be considerably strengthened if author mention all relevant facts. But, without answers of mention questions, author's arguments has no legs to stands.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 465, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'page' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'pages'.
Suggestion: pages
...hat one graduate read swiftly about 500 page reports per 2 hours; but, it might be p...
^^^^
Line 5, column 450, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: that's
...llset or he had already long experience thats why he hot top position in company. T...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, likewise, second, so, then, therefore, third, thirdly, for example, first of all, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 33.0505617978 109% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 58.6224719101 60% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 21.0 12.9106741573 163% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1955.0 2235.4752809 87% => OK
No of words: 371.0 442.535393258 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.26954177898 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38877662729 4.55969084622 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67068436547 2.79657885939 95% => OK
Unique words: 218.0 215.323595506 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.587601078167 0.4932671777 119% => OK
syllable_count: 600.3 704.065955056 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 23.0359550562 69% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.3804751367 60.3974514979 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 85.0 118.986275619 71% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.1304347826 23.4991977007 69% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.17391304348 5.21951772744 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 10.2758426966 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 5.13820224719 214% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.110908879533 0.243740707755 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0303722359328 0.0831039109588 37% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0401753183208 0.0758088955206 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.062222459731 0.150359130593 41% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0449460947605 0.0667264976115 67% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 14.1392134831 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 48.8420337079 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.1743820225 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.99 12.1639044944 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.26 8.38706741573 98% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 100.480337079 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.2143820225 75% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.