When Stanley Park first opened, it was the largest, most heavily used public park in town. It is still the largest park, but it is no longer heavily used. Video cameras mounted in the park's parking lots last month revealed the park’s drop in popularity; the recordings showed an average of only 50 cars per day. In contrast, tiny Carlton Park in the heart of the Business District is visited by more than 150 people on a typical weekday. An obvious difference is that Carlton Park, unlike Stanley Park, provides ample seating. Thus, if Stanley Park is ever to be as popular with our citizens as Carlton Park, the town will obviously need to provide more benches, thereby converting some of the unused open areas into spaces suitable for socializing.
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The argument above stated the need for Stanley Park to provide more benches in order to increase its rate of use by visitors. The writer makes this conclusion as a result of the increased ample seating space at Carlton park as well as the record from the camera recording from Stanley Park which showed fewer cars per day in the parking lot. However, for this conclusion to hold, some unstated assumptions need to be addressed or warranted.
The first assumption is that Carlton Park did not add more activities that led to the increase in the number of visitors. It is possible that Carlton Park had conducted surveys on development strategies, found out what interests visitors, and decided to add it to their park for more engagement. It is also possible that they had added more activities that will suit business owners and corporate individuals owing to the fact that Carlton park is located in the heart of the business district. If this is the case, Stanley Park should increase strategic activities and not increase the number of benches. Also, If this assumption is not justified, then the conclusion does not hold water.
Furthermore, the second unstated assumption is the comparison between the number of cars and the number of people. The writer of the argument obviously compared cars to people which made him/her draw the conclusion. It is possible that the number of people in a car at Stanley Park is between 1 to 5 people and the type of car can actually accommodate more individuals. The camera at the lot only captured the number of cars and not individuals. Maybe the visitors at Stanley Park used an alternative to private cars to get to the park due to personal reasons or a negative effect from driving a private car to Stanley Park. Well, if this assumption is not warranted, the conclusion is weakened.
In addition, the writer assumes that the use of benches which led to an increased number of visitors at Carlton park was derived from valid research. It is possible that the increased number of benches is not a proven fact. If this assumption is wrong, then Stanley Park does not need to increase the number of benches.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed, in order for it to be valid, the unstated assumptions above need to be evaluated which will justify the conclusion. However, there is a need for the writer to provide more evidence in order to ascertain the efficacy of increasing the number of benches at Stanley Park leading to an increase in the number of visitors.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-10 | Nowshin Tabassum | 63 | view |
| 2023-07-11 | shubham1102 | 60 | view |
| 2022-06-11 | Evanica | 64 | view |
| 2021-11-21 | ojehparvaz | 65 | view |
| 2021-10-16 | bislam | 83 | view |
- GRE sample issue pool essay topic 128 Educational institutions should actively encourage their students to choose fields of study that will prepare them for lucrative careers Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your 66
- A movie producer sent the following memo to the head of the movie studio We need to increase the funding for the movie Working Title by 10 in order to ensure a quality product As you know we are working with a first time director whose only previous exper 50
- The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company According to a recent report from our marketing department during the past year fewer people attended Super Screen produced movies that any 56
- Teachers salaries should be based on the academic performance of their students Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take In developing and 66
- It is primarily in cities that a nation s cultural traditions are generated and preserved 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 take In developing 66
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 2 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 1 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 435 350
No. of Characters: 2034 1500
No. of Different Words: 161 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.567 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.676 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.577 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 147 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 116 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 78 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 43 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.895 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.309 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.684 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.39 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.576 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.106 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, first, furthermore, however, if, may, second, so, then, well, in addition, in conclusion, as a result, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 67.0 55.5748502994 121% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2088.0 2260.96107784 92% => OK
No of words: 434.0 441.139720559 98% => OK
Chars per words: 4.81105990783 5.12650576532 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56428161445 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67474901934 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 204.123752495 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.387096774194 0.468620217663 83% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 649.8 705.55239521 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.0094480694 57.8364921388 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.894736842 119.503703932 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8421052632 23.324526521 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.78947368421 5.70786347227 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.266156945763 0.218282227539 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0992685817575 0.0743258471296 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0932114894125 0.0701772020484 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.177099177826 0.128457276422 138% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0618075385015 0.0628817314937 98% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 14.3799401198 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.3550499002 119% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.91 12.5979740519 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.75 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 98.500998004 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.