The following appears in a letter to the editor for the West Lansburg News:
"The tufted groundhog lives in the coastal wetlands of West Lansburg. Ancient records suggest that the tufted groundhog once numbered in the millions. Since they were declared a wildlife sanctuary in 2004, development along the coastal wetlands has been prohibited. Now local development interests are lobbying for the West Lansburg council to allow an access road to be built along the edge of wetlands. Neighboring Eastern Carpenteria, which had a similar sanctuary, has seen its sea otter population decline since the repeal of its sanctuary status in 1978. In order to preserve the region's biodiversity and ensure a healthy environment, the West Lansburg council should not allow the road to be built."
The author of the letter argues that the construction of an access road at the edge of the West Lansburg sanctuary will endager the population of tufted groundhogs. Stated in this way, the arguements fails to mention reliable and significant evidence of its assertions to be valid. To support his position, the author use the example of Eastern Carpenteria as a sanctuary where sea otter population become endangered after its alteration of sanctuary status. Nevertheless, he does not provide evidence that the real cause of the diminishing of the population was the status change. Because of the many origins of extinctions of species, the former assertion is not necessary valid. Among the reasons, can be natural or antgropogenic ones.
To be more precise, the reduction of the number of sea otter can be attributed to an increase of a new predator who kills the sea otters, or an unexpected weather change in the enviroment of Eastern Carpenteria, factors whose origin relies on natural causes. Otherwise, anthropogenic reasons as the status change can be the actual cause. If the former is the reason of the decline, then the author main example weakens his support.
The author also overlooks many assumptions and definitions. First, there is no evidence that West Lansburg is actually the home of tufted groundhogs, the sanctuary might just only be a transition zone of migration place for them. For example, exotic birds travel from the Northern Hemisphere to Southern regions during the winter. In the scenario that a certain place of the Southern regions gets polluted, the birds will just travel to other Southern regions. As consequence, there is not certain reason of why the population will decrease if the sanctuary is affected.
Even though the author example and claims are appealing, in conclusion, his arguments is unpersuasive with the current absent evidence we raise in these paragraphs. The assumptions should be made on the basis of biology and environment research whose findings can enhance the position of the author. Furthermore, there also is no reason of why the road will finally endanger the groundhogs, in the case the company is environmentally responsible, a reliable impact study and prevention measures can reduce the finaimpact on the sanctuary.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-18 | sandeshbhandari2 | 50 | view |
| 2019-10-06 | Adebayo | 63 | view |
| 2019-09-11 | banu.abdikadirova | 63 | view |
| 2019-09-11 | Ramzah Rehman | 16 | view |
| 2018-09-16 | dhruvsawhney | 24 | view |
- The purpose of higher education is to prepare students for the future, but classen students are at a serious disadvantage in the competition for post-college employment due to the university's burdensome breadth requirements. classen's job placement rate 23
- The following appears in a letter to the editor for the West Lansburg News:"The tufted groundhog lives in the coastal wetlands of West Lansburg. Ancient records suggest that the tufted groundhog once numbered in the millions. Since they were declared a wi 45
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government, industry, or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation, not competition. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagre 50
- Question Authority. Only by questioning accepted wisdom can we advance our understanding of the world. 50
- Essay topics: ISSUE TOPIC: The real talent of a popular musician cannot accurately be assessed until the musician has been dead for several generations, so that his or her fame does not interfere with honest assessment. 50
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Sentence: The author of the letter argues that the construction of an access road at the edge of the West Lansburg sanctuary will endager the population of tufted groundhogs.
Error: endager Suggestion: endanger
Sentence: Stated in this way, the arguements fails to mention reliable and significant evidence of its assertions to be valid.
Error: arguements Suggestion: arguments
Sentence: Among the reasons, can be natural or antgropogenic ones.
Error: antgropogenic Suggestion: anthropology
Sentence: To be more precise, the reduction of the number of sea otter can be attributed to an increase of a new predator who kills the sea otters, or an unexpected weather change in the enviroment of Eastern Carpenteria, factors whose origin relies on natural causes.
Error: enviroment Suggestion: environment
Sentence: Furthermore, there also is no reason of why the road will finally endanger the groundhogs, in the case the company is environmentally responsible, a reliable impact study and prevention measures can reduce the finaimpact on the sanctuary.
Error: finaimpact Suggestion: fin impact
--------------------
flaws:
in GRE argument essays, we don't use external examples (exotic birds) to make arguments.
_________________________
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.0 out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 5 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 369 350
No. of Characters: 1875 1500
No. of Different Words: 187 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.383 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.081 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.85 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 151 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 110 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 77 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 52 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.706 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.316 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.471 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.317 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.502 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.097 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, first, furthermore, if, look, nevertheless, so, then, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 28.8173652695 49% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 55.5748502994 83% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 16.3942115768 134% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1918.0 2260.96107784 85% => OK
No of words: 369.0 441.139720559 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.19783197832 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38284983912 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95532897409 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 204.123752495 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.523035230352 0.468620217663 112% => OK
syllable_count: 606.6 705.55239521 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.7692864705 57.8364921388 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.823529412 119.503703932 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7058823529 23.324526521 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.47058823529 5.70786347227 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => 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: 0.0655488316392 0.218282227539 30% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0205446344018 0.0743258471296 28% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.049782544014 0.0701772020484 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0381124559722 0.128457276422 30% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0337663751185 0.0628817314937 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.88 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.3 8.32208582834 112% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 98.500998004 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.