Last year, Kensington Academy turned over management of its cafeteria to a private vendor, Swift Nutrition. This company serves low-fat, low-calorie meals that students do not find enjoyable – my son and several of his friends came home yesterday complaining about the lunch options. While the intent of hiring Swift may have been to cause students to eat healthier foods, the plan is just going to cause students to bring their own, less healthy lunches instead of eating cafeteria food. If Swift is not replaced with another vendor, there will be serious health consequences for Kensington students.
Several questions will need to be answered before a decision of any kind can e made on this issue. First of all, how many students are actually facing this problem? The school received the letter from one such student so we are still not sure about the seriousness of the issue. The school simply cannot consider changing the vendor just for one student. Any kind of consideration can only be made if a significant number of students are actually facing this issue.
The argument mentions that the cafeteria food consists of low-fat and low-calorie meal, which begs the questions - is this meal balanced in all the required nutrients? If these meals are lacking in some of the essential vitamins or minerals, then the school should consider either changing the vendor or the type of food being served. Assuming that the school also has young growing children, the meal will be required to have adequate levels of proteins, fats and carbohydrates.
The prediction of the argument also seems a bit premature. Why will there be serious health consequences for the students? Students who eat at the cafeteria will be eating low calorie meals while other students who resort to bringing their own lunches, will not be facing any serious consequences unless they resort to extremely unhealthy food. In these cases, it might be the responsibility of the teachers and parents to make these children aware about the health aspects of different food. There can be comparatively healthy and tasty alternatives to the cafeteria food which the students can eat so there is no explicit correlation between students bringing their own food to potential serious health consequences.
The prediction also talks about replacing the current vendor, which also seems presumptuous. Even if a decision is made regarding changing the meals, the same vendor can be asked to prepare different a types of meal, that is more tastier or is a more balanced diet. Cancellation of the contract with the vendor will be a precipitative and unneeded action, without any sorts of discussion.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-18 | Chayank_11 | 78 | view |
| 2019-12-06 | chapagain08 | 50 | view |
| 2019-11-28 | Walia Farzana | 49 | view |
| 2019-11-10 | Cursed God | 83 | view |
| 2019-10-29 | Vindo | 50 | view |
- Some people believe that teaching morality should be the foundation of education. Others believe that teaching a foundation of logical reasoning would do more to produce a moral society. 66
- Company management should conduct routine monitoring of all employee e-mail correspondence. Such monitoring will reduce the waste of resources such as time and system capacity, as well as protect the company from lawsuits. 50
- A recent study indicates that children living in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal have lower levels of tooth decay than children living in suburban areas in the United States, despite the fact that people in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal re 59
- Last year, Kensington Academy turned over management of its cafeteria to a private vendor, Swift Nutrition. This company serves low-fat, low-calorie meals that students do not find enjoyable – my son and several of his friends came home yesterday compla 23
- Governments should invest as much in the arts as they do in the military. 50
Comments
Essay evaluation report
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: 16 15
No. of Words: 340 350
No. of Characters: 1685 1500
No. of Different Words: 171 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.294 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.956 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.705 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 121 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 92 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 72 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 33 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.25 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.459 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.625 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.325 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.543 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.061 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 199, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...utrients? If these meals are lacking in some of the essential vitamins or minerals, then th...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 201, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a type' or simply 'types'?
Suggestion: a type; types
...endor can be asked to prepare different a types of meal, that is more tastier or is a m...
^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 226, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'tastier' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: tastier
...pare different a types of meal, that is more tastier or is a more balanced diet. Cancellatio...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, first, if, regarding, so, still, then, while, kind of, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 28.8173652695 52% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 55.5748502994 67% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 16.3942115768 43% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1731.0 2260.96107784 77% => OK
No of words: 340.0 441.139720559 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.09117647059 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29407602571 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77705952039 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.514705882353 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 524.7 705.55239521 74% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.3892924158 57.8364921388 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.1875 119.503703932 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.25 23.324526521 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.1875 5.70786347227 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => 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: 0.138158446542 0.218282227539 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0501063259872 0.0743258471296 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0490698953052 0.0701772020484 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0916674373463 0.128457276422 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0415482499737 0.0628817314937 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 48.3550499002 121% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.39 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 98.500998004 81% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.