The author of the argument concludes that the best option to increase their audience size is by starting a "Shakespeare in the park" program. However, that conclusion is based on a number of poorly supported assumptions. Without further information, we do not have adequate evidence to determine whether the author's conclusion is valid.
To begin the argument, the author assumes that a campaign that took place two years ago and appeared to be successful can also show the same type of success today. However, the evidence relies on the fact that the interests of their customer demographic have not changed in the past two years, and that the same campaign would still engage their prospective customers. On the other hand, other aspects should be taken into consideration when launching a campaign. For example, trendiness plays a big part in today's marketing world. If the author provided that such campaigns are still trendy and popular amongst people in the area, the argument would have been more convincing.
Another weakness in the argument is that the "free plays in the park" program was launched by a completely different company with a different audience, the author is relying on the unsupported assumption that a similar program would be successful for another company. However, the differences in the audiences they attract such as age, race, gender, etc. would hurt the author's claim. Without more information on how similar both their audience and customer demographic is, we are not able to fully evaluate how it supports the conclusion.
Ultimately, unless the assumptions are addressed, the author's argument that the "Shakespeare in park" program can increase its profits fails to be convincing.
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 3 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 12 15
No. of Words: 276 350
No. of Characters: 1408 1500
No. of Different Words: 146 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.076 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.101 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.726 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 105 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 91 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 63 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 35 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.832 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.583 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.372 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.372 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.096 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 106, 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
...ease their audience size is by starting a 'Shakespeare in the park' pro...
^
Line 1, column 319, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...quate evidence to determine whether the authors conclusion is valid. To begin the argu...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 55, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...less the assumptions are addressed, the authors argument that the 'Shakespeare in ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, so, still, for example, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 28.8173652695 66% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 55.5748502994 54% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1474.0 2260.96107784 65% => OK
No of words: 276.0 441.139720559 63% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.34057971014 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07593519647 4.56307096286 89% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9830086632 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 151.0 204.123752495 74% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.547101449275 0.468620217663 117% => OK
syllable_count: 452.7 705.55239521 64% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 19.7664670659 66% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.6723422668 57.8364921388 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.384615385 119.503703932 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2307692308 23.324526521 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.30769230769 5.70786347227 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0608268988564 0.218282227539 28% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.022661472266 0.0743258471296 30% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.025355535435 0.0701772020484 36% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0406633525965 0.128457276422 32% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0138918827131 0.0628817314937 22% => 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: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.69 12.5979740519 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.97 8.32208582834 108% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 98.500998004 76% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.