The vice president of human resources at Climpson Industries sent the following recommendation to the company's president. "In an effort to improve our employees' productivity, we should implement electronic monitoring of employees' Internet use from their workstations. Employees who use the Internet from their workstations need to be identified and punished if we are to reduce the number of work hours spent on personal or recreational activities, such as shopping or playing games. By installing software to detect employees' Internet use on company computers, we can prevent employees from wasting time, foster a better work ethic at Climpson, and improve our overall profits."
In this argument, the author recommends that xxx. To support this view, the author points out that xxx. While this argument might be beneficial to some extent at first glance, the reasoning of this argument is unconvincing due to several unsubstantiated assumptions which, if not justified, will seriously challenge the author’s view. There are several questions regrading his lines of reasoning that requires further analysis. The argument could end up being pretty convincing or invalid in the end, depending on the answers to those questions.
First of all, the author’s view relies heavily on the assumption that xxx. Based on this assumption, the author, therefore propose that. However, this assumption is potentially problematic because we need evidence to verify that xxx. If xxx shows that xxx, then, xxx, therefore, xxx. However, if xxx, then xxx.
In addition, by stating that xxx, the writer rules out that xxx. However, we need more evidence to ascertain whether xxx. If new evidence shows that xxx, then, xxx, therefore, xxx. On the contrary, if xxx, then xxx.
Finally, even if the aforementioned assumptions remain tenable, the conclusion may still be unadvisable because xx. An accurate evaluation of xxx requires additional information. Specific evidence is need to show xxx.
To sum up, the evidence cited by the author does not provide enough conclusive information to make their request convincing. As result, we need additional evidence/ ask the aforementioned questions to better evaluate the argument.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 17, column 232, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...stions to better evaluate the argument.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, if, may, so, still, then, therefore, while, in addition, first of all, on the contrary, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 19.5258426966 36% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 1.0 14.8657303371 7% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 33.0505617978 67% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 58.6224719101 48% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 18.0 12.9106741573 139% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1320.0 2235.4752809 59% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 239.0 442.535393258 54% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.5230125523 5.05705443957 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.93187294222 4.55969084622 86% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99777874502 2.79657885939 107% => OK
Unique words: 134.0 215.323595506 62% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.560669456067 0.4932671777 114% => OK
syllable_count: 381.6 704.065955056 54% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 8.0 3.10617977528 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 12.0 23.0359550562 52% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 46.4681107703 60.3974514979 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 69.4736842105 118.986275619 58% => More chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 12.5789473684 23.4991977007 54% => More words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 6.42105263158 5.21951772744 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 10.2758426966 39% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 12.0 4.83258426966 248% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0186655062295 0.243740707755 8% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.00893522018345 0.0831039109588 11% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0138064559336 0.0758088955206 18% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0132994541666 0.150359130593 9% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.00383013948172 0.0667264976115 6% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 14.1392134831 77% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.3 48.8420337079 121% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.0 12.1743820225 66% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.85 12.1639044944 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.59 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 100.480337079 66% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 6.8 11.2143820225 61% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum 250 words wanted.
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.