The following appeared in an e-mail sent by the marketing director of the Classical Shakespeare Theatre of Bardville.
"Over the past ten years, there has been a 20 percent decline in the size of the average audience at Classical Shakespeare Theatre productions. In spite of increased advertising, we are attracting fewer and fewer people to our shows, causing our profits to decrease significantly. We must take action to attract new audience members. The best way to do so is by instituting a 'Shakespeare in the Park' program this summer. Two years ago the nearby Avon Repertory Company started a 'Free Plays in the Park' program, and its profits have increased 10 percent since then. If we start a 'Shakespeare in the Park' program, we can predict that our profits will increase, too."
The manager of Classical Shakespeare Theater of Bardville recommended that they should start a ‘Shakespeare in the Park’ program to attract new audience. Although they have tried to concentrate on advertising, only a few were successful. The proposition is based on Avon Repertory Company’s increase of profits by 10 percent following the inauguration of the ‘Free Plays in the Park’ program they did two years ago. However, four questions must be properly addressed for the suggestion to have an impactful result on Classical Shakespeare Theater’s profit.
First, are there any other ways to increase the profit other than implementing the program? It is possible that by lowering the operating cost of the theater would lead to an increase of revenue, hence, profit. For example, the theater may employ different actors. In this case, actors that are more affordable.
Second, will the program conducted by Avon Repertory Company have the same effect? There could be a possibility that the two ‘company’ are located in different areas. Further, we should ask, what park should the program be realized? For example, Avon could be located in locations where a large population of people fancied themselves a theatrical enthusiast.
Third, the manager puts an emphasis on drawing new audience, however, what did they do such that the current ones are not interested anymore? Perhaps, the theater keeps playing the same plays every weekends. Hence, people might not be interested to come to the theater again and prefer something new.
Fourth, did the increased profit of Avon solely came from the program? It could be because of various reasons. For example, it is not impossible that a few months ago, they moved to a smaller theater. Hence, the operating cost would be cheaper. They might have shows of different genres. As a result, a wide demographic of people could be attracted to attend their performances.
In conclusion, before properly addressing the viability of the proposition, these questions must be evaluated. If not, it is unclear whether the program will lead to an increase in theater’s profit.
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college 58
- The powerful are more respected not when they exercise their power but when they refrain from exercising it Write an essay in which you develop and support a position on the statement above In writing your essay you should consider both when the statement 66
- The following appeared in a letter from the owner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment building to its manager One month ago all the showerheads on the first five floors of Sunnyside Towers were modified to restrict the water flow to approximately one third 60
- The following appeared in an e mail sent by the marketing director of the Classical Shakespeare Theatre of Bardville Over the past ten years there has been a 20 percent decline in the size of the average audience at Classical Shakespeare Theatre productio 16
- Teachers salaries should be based on the academic performance of their students 50
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, hence, however, if, may, second, so, third, thus, for example, in conclusion, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 1.0 11.1786427146 9% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 28.8173652695 73% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 55.5748502994 68% => OK
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: 1805.0 2260.96107784 80% => OK
No of words: 341.0 441.139720559 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.29325513196 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29722995808 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89768421621 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 204.123752495 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.524926686217 0.468620217663 112% => OK
syllable_count: 546.3 705.55239521 77% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 22.8473053892 61% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.9207710513 57.8364921388 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 78.4782608696 119.503703932 66% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.8260869565 23.324526521 64% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.17391304348 5.70786347227 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.67664670659 214% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0688651475408 0.218282227539 32% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0189693845385 0.0743258471296 26% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0434519996049 0.0701772020484 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0357377477333 0.128457276422 28% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0594708152397 0.0628817314937 95% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 14.3799401198 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.27 48.3550499002 118% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.8 12.197005988 72% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.81 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.5 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 98.500998004 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.6 11.1389221557 68% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.