The following appeared in a letter from the owner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment complex to its manager.
"One month ago, all the showerheads in the first three buildings of the Sunnyside Towers complex were modified to restrict maximum water flow to one-third of what it used to be. Although actual readings of water usage before and after the adjustment are not yet available, the change will obviously result in a considerable savings for Sunnyside Corporation, since the corporation must pay for water each month. Except for a few complaints about low water pressure, no problems with showers have been reported since the adjustment. Clearly, modifying showerheads to restrict water flow throughout all twelve buildings in the Sunnyside Towers complex will increase our profits further."
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
In this passage, the author recommends to restrict water flow throughout all of twelve buildings in Sunnyside towers. To support his/her claim, the author cites a seeming positive result of reconstruction for the first three building with such approach, such as little complaints. Furthermore, few problems are reported in a month after such adaption, which is used to strengthen his/her viewpoint. Based on this result, the author aggressively suggest to spread such reconstruction to all of buildings.Quite convincing though such recommendation appears at first glance, a closer scrutiny reveals that the conclusion lack crucial supports and therefore we need more evidence to help evaluate such conclusion.
To begin with, we need more evidence to ascertain whether such water flow restriction is actually effective. First of all, while dynamic reduction to one-third of previous water consumption seems a favorable sign, figure about actual readings of water usage and the time duration after water restriction could lend more credibility to the evaluation of the author's statement about water saving effectness. If people tend to wash a longer time or the total amount of water consumption increase after such adaption, the effectness of water saving statement is in great doubt and the author's conclusion will be rendered much less advisable. Second, we need to understand whether customer's complaints have been suppressed in survey or they don't have sufficient time to report their dissatisfaction. If it turns out that the situation mentioned above doesn't reflect the truth of customer feeling or even distort the truth, we are unconvinced of the positive result of such reconstruction of water restriction.
Furthermore, we need more evidence to verify if application of such water restriction to the remaining buildings could incur other issues. While it is shown that the first building's reconstruction don't impact customer's feeling on the surface, no evidence serves to rule out the probability that customers who do washing in the first building actually have moved to the remaining building, thus they could still endure such change. However, if all of buildings are restricted with water influx, they seems lost all of chance to enjoy a better washing. Thus, additional evidence gains great significance to determine whether customers actually do such workaround after the reconstruction of the first three buildings. If new evidence shows that they actually resorts to such relocation of washing in the remaining buildings, it is reasonably safe to claim that all of changes of water maximum amount could lead to their protest and the author's conclusion will be weakened. On the contrary, if new information discloses an opposite situation, his/her conclusion will be lent great support to.
Last but not least, despite the presence of all the previous evidence, a more accurate evaluation of the author's recommendation requires additional information. Specific evidence is needed to decide whether the total reconstruction cost could overshadow the cost saving brought about by such water restriction; that is to say, even if water saving by shower refraction could give additional expense reduction, the Sunnyside Towers have to afford a raising up total reconstruction cost in the first years of reconstruction. And such cost could actually give a huge burden for company's continual progress. If the answers is positive, his/her conclusion will be weakened; on the contrary, if the promising benefit of water saving could offset such construction cost easily in a long term, his/her conclusion of reconstruction will gain more weights.
In summary, the evidence cited by the author in the passage could not provide sufficiently conclusive information to make his/her conclusion compelling. As a result, we need more evidence to better evaluate such conclusion.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-11 | Mozzie merona | 55 | view |
| 2019-11-28 | ayush12 | 29 | view |
| 2019-10-10 | asif13 | 63 | view |
| 2019-10-08 | partha159 | 34 | view |
| 2019-10-01 | parinshah2 | 50 | view |
- The following appeared in a letter to the school board in the town of Centerville."All students should be required to take the driver's education course at Centerville High School. In the past two years, several accidents in and around Centervil 82
- Claim Many problems of modern society cannot be solved by laws and the legal system Reason Laws cannot change what is in people s hearts or minds Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason 66
- The following appeared in a health newsletter A ten year nationwide study of the effectiveness of wearing a helmet while bicycling indicates that ten years ago approximately 35 percent of all bicyclists reported wearing helmets whereas today that number i 73
- Claim It is no longer possible for a society to regard any living man or woman as a hero Reason The reputation of anyone who is subjected to media scrutiny will eventually be diminished Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree o 90
- The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them not by their contemporaries Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you ta 66
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 610 350
No. of Characters: 3223 1500
No. of Different Words: 261 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.97 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.284 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.983 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 235 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 188 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 152 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 100 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 29.048 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.688 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.952 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.345 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.536 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.208 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 29, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'recommends restricting'.
Suggestion: recommends restricting
In this passage, the author recommends to restrict water flow throughout all of twelve bui...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 504, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Quite
...such reconstruction to all of buildings.Quite convincing though such recommendation a...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 358, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...re credibility to the evaluation of the authors statement about water saving effectness...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 582, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ing statement is in great doubt and the authors conclusion will be rendered much less a...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 737, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
... have been suppressed in survey or they dont have sufficient time to report their di...
^^^^
Line 5, column 847, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... out that the situation mentioned above doesnt reflect the truth of customer feeling o...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 173, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'buildings'' or 'building's'?
Suggestion: buildings'; building's
...ssues. While it is shown that the first buildings reconstruction dont impact customers fe...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 198, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...that the first buildings reconstruction dont impact customers feeling on the surface...
^^^^
Line 9, column 500, Rule ID: NON3PRS_VERB[2]
Message: The pronoun 'they' must be used with a non-third-person form of a verb: 'seem'
Suggestion: seem
... are restricted with water influx, they seems lost all of chance to enjoy a better wa...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 758, Rule ID: NON3PRS_VERB[2]
Message: The pronoun 'they' must be used with a non-third-person form of a verb: 'resort'
Suggestion: resort
...f new evidence shows that they actually resorts to such relocation of washing in the re...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 935, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...unt could lead to their protest and the authors conclusion will be weakened. On the con...
^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 106, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ence, a more accurate evaluation of the authors recommendation requires additional info...
^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 786, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...construction cost easily in a long term, his/her conclusion of reconstruction wil...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, furthermore, however, if, second, so, still, then, therefore, third, thus, while, in summary, such as, as a result, first of all, on the contrary, to begin with, that is to say
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.9520958084 147% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 36.0 28.8173652695 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 89.0 55.5748502994 160% => OK
Nominalization: 49.0 16.3942115768 299% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3300.0 2260.96107784 146% => OK
No of words: 600.0 441.139720559 136% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.5 5.12650576532 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.94923200384 4.56307096286 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0673115264 2.78398813304 110% => OK
Unique words: 272.0 204.123752495 133% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.453333333333 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 998.1 705.55239521 141% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 4.96107784431 222% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 11.0 2.70958083832 406% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 28.0 22.8473053892 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 80.1608360559 57.8364921388 139% => OK
Chars per sentence: 157.142857143 119.503703932 131% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.5714285714 23.324526521 122% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.42857142857 5.70786347227 165% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 13.0 5.25449101796 247% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.128427944562 0.218282227539 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0482759140548 0.0743258471296 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0485841143225 0.0701772020484 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0747831771888 0.128457276422 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0412093905897 0.0628817314937 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.8 14.3799401198 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.6 48.3550499002 72% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 12.197005988 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.92 12.5979740519 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.05 8.32208582834 109% => OK
difficult_words: 153.0 98.500998004 155% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 11.1389221557 119% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => 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.