The letter to the editor cites that the locals are demanding the west Lansburg council to build an access road along the edge of wetlands. It seems extremely rash to implement such a new and relatively untried strategy before the effects fully observed and interpreted.
The Letter seems obscure and lacks substantial grounds. A cohesive approach is required to analyze the given statement and demands varied shreds of evidence to support the same. Firstly, the existence of tufted groundhogs had been seen in the coastal wetlands of west Lansburg years ago, we do not know the fact that if they exist now or not? Or if they have become extant now? We also do not know that ancient records have been validated properly or not? How many people were involved in the research of tufted groundhog in coastal wetlands of West Lansburg? Were those people true to their work or they might have mentioned a lump sum number as there can be a high possibility that in ancient times they did not have the appropriate measuring tools. All the above-mentioned questions need a valid answer.
Even if the above-mentioned questions have been correctly answered, we also do not know what is the primary purpose of the locals wanting the access road. Also we do not know the enumeration of the locals. How many locals have demanded the same from the council? it can be a possibility that 10 percent of locals have asked for the same.
Also, The letter claims that the neighboring eastern carpenteria, which had a similar sanctuary, has seen a decline in the otter population since the repeal of its sanctuary status. Their can be a high possibility if the road has been constructed their can a major decline in the enumeration of animals in that area.
To conclude, the argument lacks information and seems to be on an irrational assumption, hence it states unconvincing. Lack of supporting evidence makes the argument questionable and expects the West Lansburg council to look into the above-mentioned matters before allowing the road to be built for the locals. The above argument remains unwarranted and needs to be scrutinized further before reaching a conclusion.
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK. in GRE, we always consider all data or evidence are correct.
argument 2 -- not OK.
argument 3 -- not OK
----------------
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/following-appears-…
---------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 363 350
No. of Characters: 1758 1500
No. of Different Words: 187 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.365 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.843 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.751 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 123 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 94 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 65 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 40 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.167 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.395 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.316 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.552 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.137 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: He
he letter to the editor cites that the loc...
^^
Line 1, column 4, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'he' must be used with a third-person verb: 'letters'.
Suggestion: letters
he letter to the editor cites that the locals are...
^^^^^^
Line 1, column 138, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: It
... access road along the edge of wetlands.It seems extremely rash to implement such ...
^^
Line 5, column 156, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
... of the locals wanting the access road. Also we do not know the enumeration of the l...
^^^^
Line 5, column 264, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: It
...ave demanded the same from the council? it can be a possibility that 10 percent of...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, hence, if, look, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 55.5748502994 76% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1800.0 2260.96107784 80% => OK
No of words: 362.0 441.139720559 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.97237569061 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.36191444098 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82164708212 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 187.0 204.123752495 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.516574585635 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 562.5 705.55239521 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.5228553336 57.8364921388 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.0 119.503703932 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.1111111111 23.324526521 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.27777777778 5.70786347227 40% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.195567596496 0.218282227539 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.059524616287 0.0743258471296 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0929311651099 0.0701772020484 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0920102564652 0.128457276422 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0935461331984 0.0628817314937 149% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 14.3799401198 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.95 8.32208582834 108% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 98.500998004 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.