In the Bayhead Public Library, books that are rarely borrowed continue to take up shelf space year after year, while people who want to read a recent novel frequently find that the library's only copy is checked out. Clearly, the library's plan to replace books that are borrowed no more than once a year with sufficient copies of more recent books will solve this problem. The protest we have heard since this plan was made public has come from a small, and thus unrepresentative, group of some thirty people and so should therefore be ignored.
The given memo discuss a conundrum that the management of Bayhead Public Library faces due to the variability in the demand of different books. The author's argument, which states that more copies of recently published book that are more popular should be ordered and should replace old books, which are not often checked out. This logic is based on several fallacies and needs more evidence to make a decision.
First of all, the statement that rate books take up extra shelf-space might only be due to the fact that these books are not often taken by readers. Furthermore, the value of these books is not necessarily represented in the total volume it occupies but rather in the knowledge it imparts. Moreover, there is no mention of how many rare books there are and whether these rare books occupies a major proportion of the space in the library.
Secondly, the speculation that just by purchasing new books, the persistent problem will be solved is not supported by any further evidence. In addition to this, how many of the new books needs to be purchased and whether the expense of this book will be worth the investment, that is whether the return on investment will be satisfactory needs to be analyzed. Overall, this line of reasoning does not solve the issue since more money is invested without any evidence of higher profits.
Lastly, but not least, the protest stirred up by the public announcement needs proper attention. This is because the total number of regular members who come to the library is unknown, and the possibility that they might represent a majority proportion cannot be ruled out. One other issue might be that these thirty members might read both the rare books as well as the contemporary books.
Therefore, with the several flaws stated and explained, the argument presented by the author is insufficient to make a decision. The statements need to be further verified with proper surveys and feedback from users so that a more logical and strategic decision can be taken.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-12-28 | tahmeed1993 | 51 | view |
| 2016-12-06 | KARTHIK UPPALA | 66 | view |
| 2016-09-20 | devil1994 | 66 | view |
| 2016-09-01 | devil1994 | 66 | view |
- The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a Batavia newspaper."The department of agriculture in Batavia reports that the number of dairy farms throughout thecountry is now 25 percent greater than it was 10 years ago. During this same time period 69
- Doing an enjoyable activity with a child can develop better skills and more creativity than reading. To what extent do you agree? Use reasons and specific examples to explain your answer. 11
- Some employers want to be able to contact their staff at all times, even on holidays.Does this development have more advantages than disadvantages? 73
- Some people believe it is better to study subjects that have practical applications Others however think it is better to study subjects that are theoretical Discuss both views 42
- Government around the world should stop spending billions of dollars on space research while there are millions people living below poverty line on planet earth. To what extent do you agree? 56
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 14 15
No. of Words: 341 350
No. of Characters: 1635 1500
No. of Different Words: 174 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.297 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.795 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.517 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 107 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 87 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 54 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 34 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.357 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.286 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.643 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.331 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.617 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.046 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 149, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...y in the demand of different books. The authors argument, which states that more copies...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 357, Rule ID: BOTH_AS_WELL_AS[1]
Message: Probable usage error. Use 'and' after 'both'.
Suggestion: and
... members might read both the rare books as well as the contemporary books. Therefore, w...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, if, lastly, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, in addition, as well as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 28.8173652695 76% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 55.5748502994 74% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1679.0 2260.96107784 74% => OK
No of words: 341.0 441.139720559 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.92375366569 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29722995808 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59303543832 2.78398813304 93% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 204.123752495 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.521994134897 0.468620217663 111% => OK
syllable_count: 528.3 705.55239521 75% => 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: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => 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: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.1055824875 57.8364921388 57% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 119.928571429 119.503703932 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.3571428571 23.324526521 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.78571428571 5.70786347227 154% => 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 : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.137664188385 0.218282227539 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0492801296651 0.0743258471296 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0480823414042 0.0701772020484 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0770038527129 0.128457276422 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0588824426386 0.0628817314937 94% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.3550499002 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.9 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 98.500998004 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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.