The author of this memo argues his or her preference on one paving company over the other one. It seems plausible; however, close scrutiny proves this argument weak with dubious evidence and reasonings.
First of all, acting as the vice president of the company that builds the shopping malls, there is no way to cleave off author's personal connections from the decision he or she makes. What if the author implies his or her own personal preference in choosing the company, namely the author has a mutually beneficial business agreement with Appian Roadways instead of Good Intentions Roadways? How can we know if Appian Roadways really outperforms Good Intentions Roadway or the author chooses to ignore the inverse? The potential bias makes the author's argument dubious.
Even though the author is clear from sneaky trading agreement or malfeasance with Appian Roadways, the reasonings he or she presents are hardly reliable. First of all, the author asserts than the Route 40 paved by Appian Roadways has a better performance in reliability than the Route 101 paved by Good Intentions Roadways. However, the author ignores the fact that the different weather conditions along both routes can cause disparated damages to the roads. Imagining that the Route 101 passes the area with a large variation in temperatures, for example,a city like Denver, where you can get 120F in the afternoon and 70F in the evening, whereas the weather affecting Route 40 is more stable and temperate. It is obvious that Route 101 will be damaged more severely compared to Route 40. As a result, there is no enough evidence to justify the paving results presented by these two companies, if one relies only on the damages on the roads without clearly analyze all possible factors.
Another unjustified reasoning the author presents is that new equipment and personnel do not lead to an increase in quality. Construct and paving the road around a shopping mall is different than paving a freeway. Without clarification, it is reasonable to assume that the new machine purchased by Appian Roadways might not be a good fit for paving works around the shopping mall, as one can premise with commonsense that the roads around shopping malls will be narrower compared to the freeway. Furthermore, the new-hired quality-control manager does not imply a definite burgeoning in quality. There is no way to guarantee a new employee, even with high salaries and compensations, will outperform than his colleagues. In fact, there is even no way to assure that this new employee will meet the requirements set by Appian Roadways in a short period of time, considering standards can be varied even within the same industry.
In a conclusion, the author fails to present persuasive evidence that is able to prove the outperformance of Appian Roadways to Good Intentions Roadways. More analysis in cost effectiveness, as well as in case study, need to be done before a business-like plan is finalized.
e-rater score 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: 20 15
No. of Words: 490 350
No. of Characters: 2434 1500
No. of Different Words: 246 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.705 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.967 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.741 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 189 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 140 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 100 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 57 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.5 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.21 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.55 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.313 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.313 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.144 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 125, Rule ID: CLOSE_SCRUTINY[1]
Message: Use simply 'scrutiny'.
Suggestion: scrutiny
...other one. It seems plausible; however, close scrutiny proves this argument weak with dubious ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 544, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...e inverse? The potential bias makes the authors argument dubious. Even though the aut...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 557, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , a
...e variation in temperatures, for example,a city like Denver, where you can get 120...
^^
Line 4, column 192, Rule ID: RATHER_THEN[2]
Message: Did you mean 'different 'from''? 'Different than' is often considered colloquial style.
Suggestion: from
...oad around a shopping mall is different than paving a freeway. Without clarification...
^^^^
Line 4, column 846, Rule ID: PERIOD_OF_TIME[1]
Message: Use simply 'period'.
Suggestion: period
...ments set by Appian Roadways in a short period of time, considering standards can be varied ev...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, however, if, really, so, well, whereas, for example, in fact, as a result, as well as, first of all
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 : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 27.0 28.8173652695 94% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 55.5748502994 112% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2486.0 2260.96107784 110% => OK
No of words: 489.0 441.139720559 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08384458078 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70248278971 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8280781644 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 251.0 204.123752495 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.513292433538 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 770.4 705.55239521 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.3060860642 57.8364921388 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.3 119.503703932 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.45 23.324526521 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.95 5.70786347227 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.171300576937 0.218282227539 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0571845111156 0.0743258471296 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0633119822773 0.0701772020484 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0854387847426 0.128457276422 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0664482149765 0.0628817314937 106% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.48 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.86 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 125.0 98.500998004 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.