The main problem of local commuters is the increased commuting time during rush hours. They proposed that an additional lane would solve the problem. This is reasonable if one thinks through the problem. However, opponents note how the nearby Green highway got additional lanes, and eventually, the traffic jams got worse. Here there isn’t a straight correlation, because there aren’t any further information of these traffic jams. The first question that needs answering in my opinion is why did the G H traffic jams got worse. There could be a new factory or something in the area that hired significantly more people, thus more had to commute leading to worse traffic jams.
Another assumption is that a bicycle lane would help the problem. This is assumption is based on a fact that area residents are keen bicyclists. This assumption isn’t backed by surveys or anything, so another question that needs answering is about how representative is this claim.
Addition to this, there may be keen bicyclists in the area on a sunny Saturday afternoon, but commuting is done all year long, even in winter and even in heavy rains. No factual data are in hand whether people would commute in these worse conditions.
The last assumption is about the new bicycle lane would encourage the locals to commute by bikes. This could be false in many cases. There could be many locals who couldn’t afford bikes for example. This is another question whether the non-biker locals would invest in bikes and use them. A survey could convey the required answers for the investing government.
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take 50
- Commuters complain that increased rush hour traffic on Blue Highway between the suburbs and the city center has doubled their commuting time The favored proposal of the motorists lobby is to widen the highway adding an additional lane of traffic But last 55
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 3 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 5 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 268 350
No. of Characters: 1278 1500
No. of Different Words: 147 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.046 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.769 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.524 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 83 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 68 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 38 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 29 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 15.765 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.054 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.471 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.303 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.51 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.089 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, may, so, thus, for example, in many cases, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 28.8173652695 62% => OK
Preposition: 23.0 55.5748502994 41% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1330.0 2260.96107784 59% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 264.0 441.139720559 60% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.03787878788 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03089032464 4.56307096286 88% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60676523244 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 148.0 204.123752495 73% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.560606060606 0.468620217663 120% => OK
syllable_count: 403.2 705.55239521 57% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 22.8473053892 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.9506052761 57.8364921388 59% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 78.2352941176 119.503703932 65% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.5294117647 23.324526521 67% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.76470588235 5.70786347227 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.175660919734 0.218282227539 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.055284959393 0.0743258471296 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.062170604495 0.0701772020484 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0940348505452 0.128457276422 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0880116718541 0.0628817314937 140% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.1 14.3799401198 70% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 64.71 48.3550499002 134% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.0 12.197005988 66% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.66 12.5979740519 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.73 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 98.500998004 57% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 12.3882235529 57% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 11.1389221557 72% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.9071856287 67% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.