The following appeared in a memorandum to the work-group supervisors of the GBS Company:
“The CoffeeCart beverage and food service located in the lobby of our main office building is not earning enough in
sales to cover its costs, and so the cart may discontinue operating at GBS. Given the low staff morale, as evidenced
by the increase in the number of employees leaving the company, the loss of this service could present a problem,
especially since the staff morale questionnaire showed widespread dissatisfaction with the snack machines.
Therefore, supervisors should remind the employees in their group to patronize the cart—after all, it was leased for
their convenience so that they would not have to walk over to the cafeteria on breaks.”
The argument claims that CoffeeCart neither provides satisfactory beverage and food service, nor profitable, and thus, the supervisor of the GBS company suggest to stop the service of Coffee Cart. The author states that the loss the service could become a problem since the rising number of employees leave the company and less people use the service. Stated in this way, the argument fails to mention several important factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The statement relies on unstated assumptions and unreliable logic. Hence, the argument is weak and has several flaws.
First, the argument readily assumes that the loss occurred by the CoffeeCart service would be a loss of the company. According to the passage, the profit of selling beverage and food seems the main purpose of the CoffeeCart. However, the statement is problematic and not substantiated. Even though the snack machine does no provides economic profit to the company, it could provide an improved environment for the employees to have a break. For example, the workers of the company could increase their work efficiency after they enjoy the snacks and coffee. In this case, the profit from the improved work speed would help GBS Company earn more money to cover the cost of the loss of the CoffeeCart. Without stating the fact, the argument lacks the proof that removing the snack machine would benefit the company. It could have been much clearer if the argument provided the evidence that the CoffeeCart does not improve any efficiency of the work of the employees.
Second, the argument claims that the staff morale questionnaire showed widespread dissatisfaction with the service of the machine, suggesting that removing the CoffeeCart is reasonable. This is again a weak and unsupported claim as the argument does not state any correlation between the will of the company employees to stop using the machine and their dissatisfaction of the machine. Employees may want to improve the quality of the snacks sold on CoffeeCart, but not stop using it. Employees of the company prefer enjoying inferior snack service rather than not using any food service at all. If the argument had provided the survey result showing that the employees do not want to use the CoffeeCart service, the argument could have been strengthened even further.
To sum up, the argument is neither persuasive nor well-reasoned, failing to mention key factors mentioned above. If the author had provided more comprehensive perspectives as mentioned in the essay, the argument could have been considerably strengthened. Without this information, the argument remains problematic and unconvincing.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 154, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'suggest stopping'.
Suggestion: suggest stopping
...thus, the supervisor of the GBS company suggest to stop the service of Coffee Cart. The author ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 324, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun people is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...mber of employees leave the company and less people use the service. Stated in this ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ument is weak and has several flaws. First, the argument readily assumes that...
^^^^
Line 3, column 329, Rule ID: DOES_X_HAS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'provide'? As 'do' is already inflected, the verb cannot also be inflected.
Suggestion: provide
.... Even though the snack machine does no provides economic profit to the company, it coul...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ciency of the work of the employees. Second, the argument claims that the sta...
^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...have been strengthened even further. To sum up, the argument is neither persu...
^^^^
Line 7, column 245, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...he argument could have been considerably strengthened. Without this information, ...
^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'first', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'second', 'so', 'then', 'thus', 'well', 'for example', 'to sum up']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.268656716418 0.25644967241 105% => OK
Verbs: 0.168443496802 0.15541462614 108% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0575692963753 0.0836205057962 69% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0362473347548 0.0520304965353 70% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0149253731343 0.0272364105082 55% => OK
Prepositions: 0.102345415778 0.125424944231 82% => OK
Participles: 0.0575692963753 0.0416121511921 138% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.82385491961 2.79052419416 101% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0234541577825 0.026700313972 88% => OK
Particles: 0.00213219616205 0.001811407834 118% => OK
Determiners: 0.174840085288 0.113004496875 155% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0255863539446 0.0255425247493 100% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00426439232409 0.0127820249294 33% => Some subClauses wanted starting by 'Which, Who, What, Whom, Whose.....'
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2680.0 2731.13054187 98% => OK
No of words: 427.0 446.07635468 96% => OK
Chars per words: 6.27634660422 6.12365571057 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54576487731 4.57801047555 99% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.395784543326 0.378187486979 105% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.32318501171 0.287650121315 112% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.220140515222 0.208842608468 105% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.117096018735 0.135150697306 87% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82385491961 2.79052419416 101% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 207.018472906 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.459016393443 0.469332199767 98% => OK
Word variations: 50.0793138318 52.1807786196 96% => OK
How many sentences: 21.0 20.039408867 105% => OK
Sentence length: 20.3333333333 23.2022227129 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.8163027371 57.7814097925 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.619047619 141.986410481 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3333333333 23.2022227129 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.619047619048 0.724660767414 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.14285714286 78% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 3.58251231527 195% => Correct essay format wanted or double check grammar & spelling issues after essay writing.
Readability: 52.6518345043 51.9672348444 101% => OK
Elegance: 1.95145631068 1.8405768891 106% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.647721562317 0.441005458295 147% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.146203193325 0.135418324435 108% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0756855824654 0.0829849096947 91% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.652671324136 0.58762219726 111% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.136287232888 0.147661913831 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.342173891578 0.193483328276 177% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.115429674801 0.0970749176394 119% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.659646668108 0.42659136922 155% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.152746615332 0.0774707102158 197% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.517922559414 0.312017818177 166% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.113825061586 0.0698173142475 163% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.33743842365 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.87684729064 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.82512315271 21% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 8.0 6.46551724138 124% => OK
Negative topic words: 10.0 5.36822660099 186% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.82389162562 35% => OK
Total topic words: 19.0 14.657635468 130% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.