The author states that the solution, to adjust all showerheads to one-third of what it used to be, can save more money and increase the profits. However, the author needs to support several assumptions to make the claim more convincing.
The argument mentions the change of the showerheads flow to one-third can raise the money to the Sunnyside Tower. However, the article also mentions that there are no actual reports of water usage that the assumption may not save money to Sunnyside Tower. If the flow decline to one-third, the time to shower might also increase three times since residents need more time taking the shower to clean their body so that the prescription is no practical influence on increasing the profit. Even if the water usage truly declines and increases a lot of money to Sunnyside Tower, the residents might not willing to take the change of the water flow decline. Besides, they might against the Sunnyside Tower and asked to restore the previous flow of the water. Since the Sunnyside Tower need to calm the dispute, the Sunnyside Tower has to pay the extra money to alternate the showerhead make the Sunnyside Tower might lose more money than before.
The article also illustrates there is no many residents complain about the new change in the showerhead and only a few people complain about the low water pressure. Nevertheless, the assumption needs more evidence to support because residents might always complain about the prescription to others that the manager didn’t know. Maybe the residents figure that if they complain about the change, they might plague with the Sunnyside Tower’s pressure to move out the building so they probably upload their opinions to the Internet anonymously to decry the prescription of restricting showerheads to one-third. Since the complaint was upload on the internet, the prestige of the Sunnyside Tower might be attacked might make people decline their willingness to move to the Sunnyside Tower.
The author also tries to copy the prescription from the first three buildings to the other twelve buildings to decline the showerheads to one-third. However, the resident in the building is different from the third building to the others that their opinions might also be different, so the assumptions still fail to convince the reader. Although the first building residents agree to restrict the showerheads, the other buildings residents probably refuse to implement the prescription. The assumption to restrict showerheads needs more detail and more strong evidence to convincing all residents, otherwise, the assumption must be blocked by residents who disagree with the proposal that the proposal not only is blocked, also make their profit decline.
In conclusion, the piece assumes a lot based on very narrow evidence that the author needs to address the above assumptions to strengthen the argument.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-09-03 | Lawrence1105 | 59 | view |
- Society should make efforts to save endangered species only if the potential extinction of those species is the result of human activities 58
- The surest indicator of a great nation is represented not by the achievements of its rulers artists or scientists but by the general welfare of its people 50
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement It is important to know about events happening around the world even if it is unlikely that they will affect your daily life Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 60
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement The ability to maintain friendships with a small number of people over a long period of time is more important for happiness than the ability to make many new friends easily Use specific reasons and ex 70
- The city commissioner states that the funding to the symphony should decline since the contribution elevates and more people attend the concert in the park let the price of the ticket increase However to make this prescription convince more public some qu 60
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 15 15
No. of Words: 426 350
No. of Characters: 2178 1500
No. of Different Words: 168 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.543 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.113 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.638 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 149 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 121 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 98 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 62 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 28.4 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.596 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.8 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.399 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.399 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.145 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 39, Rule ID: NOW[2]
Message: Did you mean 'now' (=at this moment) instead of 'no' (negation)?
Suggestion: now
... The article also illustrates there is no many residents complain about the new c...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, first, however, if, may, nevertheless, so, still, then, third, as to, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 19.6327345309 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 28.8173652695 59% => OK
Preposition: 61.0 55.5748502994 110% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2219.0 2260.96107784 98% => OK
No of words: 425.0 441.139720559 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.22117647059 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54043259262 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71630320734 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 204.123752495 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.418823529412 0.468620217663 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 687.6 705.55239521 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.76447105788 160% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
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: 28.0 22.8473053892 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 48.9501333559 57.8364921388 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 147.933333333 119.503703932 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.3333333333 23.324526521 121% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.53333333333 5.70786347227 114% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => 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: 0.229287205012 0.218282227539 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0873201690925 0.0743258471296 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0642259679163 0.0701772020484 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.138378069184 0.128457276422 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0439604046892 0.0628817314937 70% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.3 14.3799401198 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.06 48.3550499002 89% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.15 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 98.500998004 85% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 12.3882235529 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 11.1389221557 119% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.