Claitown University needs both affordable housing for its students and a way to fund the building of such housing. The best solution to this problem is to commission a famous architect known for experimental and futuristic buildings. It is common knowledge that tourists are willing to pay money to tour some of the architect's buildings, so it can be expected that tourists will want to visit this new building. The income from the fees charged to tourists will soon cover the building costs. Furthermore, such a building will attract new students as well as donations from alumni. And even though such a building will be much larger than our current need for student housing, part of the building can be used as office space.
The Claitown University needs both hostel for students and also way to fund the building so to solve this problem they want to hire the architect with high commission, this statement which stated by the author is self contradictory. The architect work will attract the tourist therefore, the tourist money will cover the cost of building whereas this assumption of author will fail with lack of valid reason.
Firstly, they want hire the famous architect with high commission who can solve their problem of housing. Whereas the above statement is contradicting the university has no money for new housing building, how can they afford for the new architect. The author has failed to express how they have so much money to hire a architect and also instead of spending money on architect they could renovate the old building which helps for the students housing.
Secondly, because of architect the building will be renovated so that it will attract the tourist. Using tourist money they can cover the building cost. This assumption is invalid because the same building is used for student housing and also for tourist visit. Tourist will pay for their visit if the building is clean and maintained, which is not possible because the students housing will eventually become dirty and carelessly maintained. Therefore, the university cannot be succeed in both the things either they can build housing for students or housing for tourist visit. The author failed to give valid reason how this will work.
Lastly, they want fund from the new students from alumni so they can help to build large housing where the remaining space will be used for office. The new students will only fund because of there nostalgic feeling towards the old housing, if the old housing is renovated with architect the yearn of old memories will be completely destroy for the alumni students. Hence, funding for the housing will be failed. Instead of hiring architect the university people should have approached the alumni students for funding for housing to build or renovate the old housing then the problem would have solved for the university to build large housing for students.
In conclusion, the author argument has many flaws which he is unable to explain makes the argument weak and confusing for the reader. He should have explained how the same building will be used for students and tourist so they can cover the building cost. How they will get fund from alumni students then argument would have become valid and clear.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-10-01 | Primace | 58 | view |
| 2019-07-09 | liakath96 | 55 | view |
| 2019-07-06 | goelchirag21 | 83 | view |
| 2019-07-06 | goelchirag21 | 83 | view |
| 2019-02-08 | mmgangrade | 89 | view |
- Competition for high grades seriously limits the quality of learning at all levels of education 66
- what most human beings really want to attain is not knowledge, but certainty. Gaining real knowledge requires taking risks and keeping the mind open-but most people prefer to be reassured rather than to learn the complex and often unsettling truth about a 50
- In order to save a considerable amount of money, Rockingham's century-old town hall should be torn down and replaced by the larger and more energy-efficient building that some citizens have proposed. The old town hall is too small to comfortably accommoda 58
- To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities. 50
- "It is dangerous to trust only intelligence." 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 318, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...ess how they have so much money to hire a architect and also instead of spending ...
^
Line 7, column 288, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...old housing is renovated with architect the yearn of old memories will be completely dest...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 350, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ment would have become valid and clear.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, hence, if, lastly, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, whereas, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 26.0 12.9520958084 201% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 28.8173652695 76% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 55.5748502994 56% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 7.0 16.3942115768 43% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2104.0 2260.96107784 93% => OK
No of words: 419.0 441.139720559 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.0214797136 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52432199235 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.40067943971 2.78398813304 86% => OK
Unique words: 157.0 204.123752495 77% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.374701670644 0.468620217663 80% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 619.2 705.55239521 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Interrogative: 2.0 0.471057884232 425% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.5569523342 57.8364921388 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.888888889 119.503703932 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2777777778 23.324526521 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.66666666667 5.70786347227 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => 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: 0.326284032414 0.218282227539 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.136863610221 0.0743258471296 184% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.088726855158 0.0701772020484 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.213440436929 0.128457276422 166% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0571573556015 0.0628817314937 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.3550499002 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.38 8.32208582834 89% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 98.500998004 70% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.