The following appeared in the annual report from the president of the National Brush Company.
"In order to save money, we at the National Brush Company have decided to pay our employees for each brush they produce instead of for the time they spend producing brushes. We believe that this policy will lead to the production of more and better brushes, will allow us to reduce our staff size, and will enable the company factories to operate for fewer hours — resulting in savings on electricity and security costs. These changes will ensure that the best workers keep their jobs and that the company will earn a profit in the coming year."
This passage claims that the National Brush Company have decided to pay their employees for each produced brush instead of for working time because of it helps to company save money and earn a profit this logic has several flaws, and, therefore is not convincing. The logic of the argument is compromised because the author fails to mention some important aspects, suggest groundless cause-effect reasoning, relies on numerous unsupported assumptions,
First of all, the author claims that this policy will lead to the production of more and better brushes. When making such a statement the author assumes that the quantity and quality of products depend only on workers' salaries. Indeed, the author’s argumentation can seem logical at first glance. However, the author fails to mention that the quantity and the quality of producing brushes can depend on materials, the technology of producing and other factors. Therefore, the author’s argument is doubtful because it contains a major flaw in reasoning.
If the author had provided more relevant information his argument would have been more convincing.
Second, the argument suggests that the company factories will operate for fewer hours and it will lead to savings on electricity and security costs. Again, this logic may seem reasonable and justified to the inattentive reader. Nevertheless, a careful analysis reveals a major weakness in the author’s argumentation. The author ignores the possibility that the increasing quantity of brushes will increase and the consumption of electricity, and, consequently, the cost of electricity.
This problem could have been avoided if the author had mentioned numbers.
Finally, the argument points out that this way of reorganization will allow the company to reduce staff size. However, it may be the case that if they reduce staff their profit will be on the same level. But the author totally ignores to consider such a scenario in the passage
This problem could have been avoided if the author had provided a careful analysis of all facts and factors relevant to the matters.
In conclusion, the argument contains several logical inconsistencies. The author’s reasoning, therefore, is doubtful and hardly convincing
- The bar chat illustrates the numbers of children divided by gender who played six different types of sport in a town in England in 2012. 56
- This pie charts illustrate the ratio of three different groups of citizens( 0-14 years, 15-59 years, 60+ years) who lived In Yemen and Italy in 2000 and who will live in 2050. 67
- In most professions and academic fields, imagination is more important than knowledge. 62
- "We recommend that Monarch Books open a café in its store. Monarch, having been in business at the same location for more than twenty years, has a large customer base because it is known for its wide selection of books on all subjects. Clearly, opening t 58
- The following appeared in the annual report from the president of the National Brush Company."In order to save money, we at the National Brush Company have decided to pay our employees for each brush they produce instead of for the time they spend pr 42
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: 19 15
No. of Words: 348 350
No. of Characters: 1829 1500
No. of Different Words: 167 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.319 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.256 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.748 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 148 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 121 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 75 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 41 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.316 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.417 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.895 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.352 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.649 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.06 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 8 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 452, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ies on numerous unsupported assumptions, First of all, the author claims that thi...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...t contains a major flaw in reasoning. If the author had provided more relevant i...
^^
Line 11, column 492, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... consequently, the cost of electricity. This problem could have been avoided if ...
^^^^
Line 23, column 110, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... The author's reasoning, therefore, is doubtful and hardly convincing
^^
Line 23, column 128, Rule ID: ADVERB_WORD_ORDER[3]
Message: The adverb 'hardly' is usually not used at the end of a sentence.
... reasoning, therefore, is doubtful and hardly convincing
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, finally, first, however, if, may, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, in conclusion, first of all
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: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 55.5748502994 61% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1919.0 2260.96107784 85% => OK
No of words: 348.0 441.139720559 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.51436781609 5.12650576532 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31911543099 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96374022317 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 204.123752495 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.485632183908 0.468620217663 104% => OK
syllable_count: 585.9 705.55239521 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 67.0034859394 57.8364921388 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.882352941 119.503703932 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4705882353 23.324526521 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.88235294118 5.70786347227 121% => OK
Paragraphs: 8.0 5.15768463074 155% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.151372746515 0.218282227539 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0449288908064 0.0743258471296 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0903525545794 0.0701772020484 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0639237454251 0.128457276422 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0882089059833 0.0628817314937 140% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 14.3799401198 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.3550499002 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.68 12.5979740519 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.71 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 98.500998004 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 17.5 12.3882235529 141% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
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.