According to the head of the tourism bureau on the island of Tria, extra charges placed on the tourists to preserve the beach sand would yield beneficial results in the long term, as it would reduce the sand's damage on the buildings and beaches. Although superficially seeming convincing and robust, it still requires more specific evidence to prove its validity of the argument.
The foremost evidence the tourism burea has to identity and collect is the extent of tourists' backlash to the charge. The passage claims that only "a few tourists" would be tempered by the introduction of charge - however, it does not give a specific number of tourists who would repel against this and refuse to come eventually. If the number of reduction in tourists appear to be signicant and more than "a few," it would actually deface the local tourism and more broadly the overall local economy. A financial loss incurred from the change might go over the other benefits of preservation the passage mentions, hurting the industry in the long run in reality. Thus, if the aforementione case yields to be true, then the passage's argument would gravely lose its strength.
In addition to the potential financial risk, another evidence to garner and analyze is the frequency of the storms. Even though the erosion might appear severe in the beaches, erosion would not affect the buildings unless there are freqent large-scale storms carrying sand and bombarding the neightborhood with it. If the storms hit the island with a rarity, the need and urgency of the charge actually dwindles, as the erosion of sand would elicit relatively inconsequential or even trivial consequences to the tourist industry. Rather, they could spend those raised charges on other investments, such as revamping the infrastructures or developing new kinds of amentities, to witness a greater degree of benefits to the industry. Clearly, if the grasped evidence reveals that the storms do not come regularly, the passage's argument comes at stake.
Lastly, the bureau has to examine how relevant the precedent case of the adjacent island of Batia is to the case of island of Tria. The passage weaves the fact that nearby island of Batia's replenishing of sand to shore up its claim. What it lacks, though, is how jibing the two islands are in other aspects, such as severity of erosion. In some cases, the island of Batia might have suffered from a bigger purveiw of erosion on its beach sand. With especially worse erosion in the island, it would have perceived its repelenishing indispensible for the survival of the city - of course, this may not be the case for the island of Tria. They could have a more benign case. Furthermore, the two islands might differ in the size of tourism. Batia's economy might completely rely on tourism, whereas Tria might not and even can sustain itself without the influx of outer expenses. If either case proves to be true, then the passage likewise would witness tailspinning in its argument's validity.
To wrap it up, despite all the evidence the passage has compiled and evaluated, it still fails to lend a cogent claim. In fact, it relies on incomplete evidence and needs a further explorations of evidence to prove its validity. Thus, it can be concluded that it is too foolhardy to accept the passage's claim until further understandings and evaluations of evidence as well as its implications are conducted.
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 4 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 17 2
No. of Sentences: 24 15
No. of Words: 570 350
No. of Characters: 2778 1500
No. of Different Words: 261 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.886 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.874 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.675 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 214 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 156 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 99 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 50 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.75 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.273 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.75 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.298 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.5 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.075 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 428, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , &apos
...o be signicant and more than 'a few,' it would actually deface the local tou...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 745, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'passages'' or 'passage's'?
Suggestion: passages'; passage's
...ntione case yields to be true, then the passages argument would gravely lose its strengt...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 817, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'passages'' or 'passage's'?
Suggestion: passages'; passage's
...t the storms do not come regularly, the passages argument comes at stake. Lastly, the...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, furthermore, however, if, lastly, likewise, may, so, still, then, thus, well, whereas, as to, in addition, in fact, of course, such as, as well as, in some cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.9520958084 170% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 13.6137724551 37% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 82.0 55.5748502994 148% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2868.0 2260.96107784 127% => OK
No of words: 570.0 441.139720559 129% => OK
Chars per words: 5.03157894737 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.88617158649 4.56307096286 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75766196194 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 277.0 204.123752495 136% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.485964912281 0.468620217663 104% => OK
syllable_count: 899.1 705.55239521 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 4.96107784431 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 2.70958083832 332% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.22255489022 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.8245894119 57.8364921388 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.5 119.503703932 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.75 23.324526521 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.125 5.70786347227 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.233541799227 0.218282227539 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0690328720326 0.0743258471296 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0797697924829 0.0701772020484 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.126548071605 0.128457276422 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0955563023785 0.0628817314937 152% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.3799401198 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.19 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.93 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 150.0 98.500998004 152% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.