In the preceding argument, the store owners in the Central Plaza attributed a decrease in shoppers to skateboarders in the plaza, and thus recommend the government to prohibit skateboarding in the plaza to save their business. Although this argument seems apealling at first glance, upon careful scrutinity, it is rife with wholes and flaws.
Firstly, it cannot be sure if skateboarding in the plaza is the main reason why the Central Plaza shops witnessed a drop in shoppers in the past two years. It seems reasonable, but the attraction of a shopping center is defined by many other factors. For example, it is possible that another modern shopping center with more high-quality goods and more affordable prices just opened two years ago near the Central Plaza, and gained popularity gradually, attracting more shoppers who once loved the Central Plaza to that store. Thus, a more thorough investigation with professional analysis should be carried out to reveal the main reason why fewer people now shop at the Central Plaza.
What's more, the author believed skateboarders also bring about lots of litter and vandalism, which is another factor discouraging people from visiting the shops. Although it is true the skateboard users can be annoying, but we do not know if indeed they are responsible for those litter and vandalism. Again, a more complicated survey and observation is in need. For instance, it could be that the government are not investing enough money to maintain the whole square, leading to a worse environment.
Last not least, based on the arguments in the letter, the author stated prohibing skateboarding in the plaza will definitely save the worsen business to previous level. It may be true that less skateboard users allows for a peaceful and clean plaza, but the connection between no skateboarding and high business level is not concrete. The skateboard players are also potential customers, and totally prohibiting them may not be able to accelerate business in Central Plaza greatly to the previous level.
Summing up, it is undeniable that inhibiting skateboard in the palaz will be helpful for a better and quiter environment, but perhaps not enough to revitalize the business in the Central Plaza. In fact, a more complicated and thorough solution is need, following thorough market analysis and investigations.
- TPO-21 - Integrated Writing Task Genetic modification, a process used to change an organism’s genes and hence its characteristics, is now being used to improve trees through genetic modification. It is possible to create trees that produce more fruit, g 70
- The following appeared as a letter to the editor from a Central Plaza store owner."Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central 94
- TPO-26 - Independent Writing Task Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?It is better for children to choose jobs that are similar to their parents’ jobs than to choose jobs that are very different from their parents’ job.Use specific r 86
- TPO-33 - Independent Writing Task Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?When teachers assign projects on which students must work together, the students learn much more effectively than when they are asked to work alone on projects.Use spe 73
- TPO-33 - Independent Writing Task Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?When teachers assign projects on which students must work together, the students learn much more effectively than when they are asked to work alone on projects.Use spe 90
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: What's
...eople now shop at the Central Plaza. Whats more, the author believed skateboarders...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 131, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...rding in the plaza will definitely save the worsen business to previous level. It may be t...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, may, so, thus, for example, for instance, in fact, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 11.1786427146 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 28.8173652695 66% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 55.5748502994 77% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1979.0 2260.96107784 88% => OK
No of words: 379.0 441.139720559 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.22163588391 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41224685777 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91922906669 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 202.0 204.123752495 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.532981530343 0.468620217663 114% => OK
syllable_count: 609.3 705.55239521 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 7.0 1.67365269461 418% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => 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: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.4008818265 57.8364921388 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.933333333 119.503703932 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.2666666667 23.324526521 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.13333333333 5.70786347227 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.308124371853 0.218282227539 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.100646504868 0.0743258471296 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.103913665371 0.0701772020484 148% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.165288216777 0.128457276422 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0884225707183 0.0628817314937 141% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.8 14.3799401198 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.75 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 98.500998004 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.