True success can be measured primarily in terms of the goals one sets for oneself.
the committee failed to recognize all essential elements in order to evaluate his or her own position. We still need more evidence in order to prove the phenomenon mentioned in the argument.
Firstly, the author says that the birthrate is declining in last five years. But we still need more information about this point, for we should make it clear that whether this decrease is severe. If the birthrate is 3% in five years ago, for example, and it is 2.5% now, even though it has declined but that is not a big problem. So, if the birthrate does not decline a lot, that is unreasonable to adduce that the number of students enrolled in schools will decrease dramatically. The number could decrease, but it is not significant enough to make governments take actions to respond it. Only the birthrate has decreased a lot to 1% or even less, the argument could be correct. The author should offer more information about this, or the author can take a survey to clarify this point.
Besides, even if the number of students decrease dramatically, we still need evidence that can help us to conclude that it is safe to reduce educational funds. We should acknowledge that governments should have a rational funds budget for every part like education, residents’ welfare, development and so on. Reallocating the funds from education to other parts may lead to a bad ending. We can never predict the next year’s situation; the governments should reserve some funds in order to prevent emergency events. Although the events could never happen, the governments still could use these funds enhance the quality of the education. Governments could upgrade hardware of schools, buy more books for students, offer a better fellowship, or hire more famous teachers. We cannot just remove these funds because of possible less students. If the committee wants to persuade more to believe in the recommendation, stronger evidence must be presented.
Like we have talked above, the committee says that governments can reduce funding for athletic playing fields and other recreational facilities is also problematic. If the funds for these parts are reduced, on the one hand, the children will have less places to relax and have fun with their friends, they may get a bad mood and cannot get a happy childhood, that could be terrible for their whole life. On the other hand, without enough funds to maintain existed fields, children are easier to get hurt. The committee should reconsider this point and provide more evidence to hold on the position.
Last but not the least, why the governments have to save money from education to fund city facilities and programs used by adults. If the city funds more to children, the parents would also be attracted by the city. The committee seems to believe that more adults could reverse the birthrate’s decline, however, does not the city have enough adults now? The committee should think about this question, if there are enough adults then why they do not give birth to children anymore. The author should take more surveys and provide more evidence that could prove that the recommendation is useful and could lead to a higher birthrate.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
the committee failed to recognize all essen...
^^^
Line 5, column 826, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun students is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
... remove these funds because of possible less students. If the committee wants to per...
^^^^
Line 7, column 248, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun places is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...on the one hand, the children will have less places to relax and have fun with their...
^^^^
Line 9, column 483, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... do not give birth to children anymore. The author should take more surveys and pro...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, firstly, however, if, may, so, still, then, for example, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 32.0 12.4196629213 258% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 43.0 33.0505617978 130% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 54.0 58.6224719101 92% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 12.9106741573 163% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2655.0 2235.4752809 119% => OK
No of words: 533.0 442.535393258 120% => OK
Chars per words: 4.98123827392 5.05705443957 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.80487177365 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66388234104 2.79657885939 95% => OK
Unique words: 250.0 215.323595506 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.46904315197 0.4932671777 95% => OK
syllable_count: 813.6 704.065955056 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 14.0 4.99550561798 280% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 9.0 3.10617977528 290% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.2370786517 128% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.4495224094 60.3974514979 59% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 102.115384615 118.986275619 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5 23.4991977007 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.88461538462 5.21951772744 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.83258426966 166% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.074236788048 0.243740707755 30% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0217922751007 0.0831039109588 26% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.026770766826 0.0758088955206 35% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0428919657596 0.150359130593 29% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.033295008169 0.0667264976115 50% => 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: 12.3 14.1392134831 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.8420337079 122% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.6 12.1639044944 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.89 8.38706741573 94% => OK
difficult_words: 110.0 100.480337079 109% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 11.8971910112 63% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.