The council has made a prediction that if the development of existing farmland in Maple County is prevented, the housing prices will increase significantly. The author has also provided reasons and some instances to support and also to negate this prediction. When one perfunctorily goes through the lines, he may find the arguments and the claims to be reasonable. But thorough scrutiny shows that they are based on unsupported assumptions and vague terminologies, which in turn make the claim incredible.
The author has provided two cases of other towns to clarify the effect of preventing existing farmlands' development. One of them is about Chestnut County, which supports the proponents of the measure. It tells that the housing prices increased modestly since the measure was put into action ten years ago. Other is about Pine County where the measure was carried out fifteen years ago and whose real estate prices doubled in that period. This incident supports the opponents of the measure. But much information regarding these two instances has been left unclear by the author. There must be various reasons behind these changes which should also be specified in the argument, and how much was their significance in doing so, which, if included in the argument, would have made it more credible.
There are numerous reasons behind the fluctuation of real estate value, such as location of the house, its neighbourhood, the current status of economy, etc. These factors play a major role in deciding the level of increment or decrement in housing prices. In the two cases made by the proponents and the opponents, there must be various other factors playing a major role in deciding the outcome, which are not specified by the author, such as, likely development of new malls and better public amenities in Pine County and no growth in job prospects in Chestnut County, leading to emigrating citizens. These factors must also have been included in the case studies of the two towns to get a more accurate picture of such measures.
The author should factor in the current scenario of Maple County into his argument, which has deliberately been left out. Factors such as the current economy of the citizens, if it is in an upward or downward trend, or the rate of growth of job openings, or planned future developments of public amenities and places should be researched about and stated to make the argument more sound.
The prediction made by the council seems to be made randomly by skimming through two past cases in two different counties. No robust reasons have been provided behind the prediction and many important factors have been left out by the author. To make the prediction more plausible, well researched past cases along with a detailed current scenario of Maple County should have been presented. Otherwise, prophesying that preventing the development of existing farmland in the county will lead to a significant rise in housing prices is completely unreliable.
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. 50
- "The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government, industry, or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation, not competition." - Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or dis 50
- The council of Maple County, concerned about the county's becoming overdeveloped, is debating a proposed measure that would prevent the development of existing farmland in the county. But the council is also concerned that such a restriction, by limiting 55
- 'The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station.“Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news. During this time period, most of the c 55
- Claim: The emergence of the online “blogosphere” and social media has significantly weakened the quality of political discourse in the United States.Reason: When anyone can publish political opinions easily, standards for covering news and political t 79
Essay evaluation 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: 20 15
No. of Words: 492 350
No. of Characters: 2448 1500
No. of Different Words: 222 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.71 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.976 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.621 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 182 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 136 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 94 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 54 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.6 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.052 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.55 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.323 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.495 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.095 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 95, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'farmlands'' or 'farmland's'?
Suggestion: farmlands'; farmland's
...arify the effect of preventing existing farmlands development. One of them is about Chest...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, may, regarding, so, well, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 11.1786427146 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 74.0 55.5748502994 133% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2505.0 2260.96107784 111% => OK
No of words: 492.0 441.139720559 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09146341463 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70967865282 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71440254845 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 204.123752495 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.457317073171 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 774.9 705.55239521 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.2387482758 57.8364921388 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.285714286 119.503703932 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4285714286 23.324526521 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.28571428571 5.70786347227 40% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => 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: 0.164398600435 0.218282227539 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0508612853278 0.0743258471296 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0514777892095 0.0701772020484 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0961480835264 0.128457276422 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0209717852352 0.0628817314937 33% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 14.3799401198 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.54 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.4 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 113.0 98.500998004 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.