In the editorial from the health newspaper, the author concludes that the government should hold an educational program for bicycle users to make them aware that there are some other important factors than just wearing a helmet contributing to their safety while riding a bicycle. The author reaches this conclusion based on statistical data indicating that today, approximately 80 percent of bicyclists use helmets, while this percentage was nearly 35 percent ten years ago. On the other hand, the number of accidents caused by bicycle users has increased by 200 percent over this period since bicyclists feel safer due to the use of helmets and ride more carelessly. Nevertheless, while the conclusion drawn by the writer might hold water, it rests on several unfounded assumptions that, if not substantiated, dramatically weaken its persuasiveness. Thus, the following three questions must be addressed.
First of all, is the number of people riding bicycles today the same as ten years ago? It is probable that the number of bicyclists has increased during the past ten years, and likewise, the number of accidents involving bicycle users. For instance, assume that ten years ago, there were only 100 bicycle users, 35 people of whom wore helmets. Today, there are 1000 bicyclists, 850 of whom use the protective helmet. This vast difference between bicycle users might result in an increase in the number of accidents even if they ride safer than before. If this scenario has merit, the author's assertion that the carelessness of bicyclists is to blame for the increase in the number of accidents is significantly hampered.
Secondly, are these two studies done by the same organization? As it is mentioned in the memo, the study regarding the number of people using helmets before and now and the study concerned with the increase in the number of accidents during the last ten years are conducted by two different organizations. There might be inconsistency in the result of these studies since they have been done independently. The argument does not hold water if the above is true.
Finally, are the bicyclist are those who to blame for the increase in the number of accidents or pedestrians or drivers? Nowadays, people are more careless than ten years ago since they are more involved in doing simultaneous tasks. For example, more people today talk on the phone while walking or driving. It is probable that in most of these accidents, the one who is to blame is not the bicyclist but the inattentive driver or pedestrian. If it is true that bicyclists are not responsible for most of these accidents, the credibility of the writer's claim decreases substantially.
To recapitulate, it is probable that today's bicycle users are more inattentive than before since they think that the use of helmets warranties their safety, and making them aware of other safety factors results in a reduction in the number of accidents that include bicycle users. Nonetheless, as it stands now, the argument relies on three unanswered questions that render its conclusion unpersuasive at best and specious at worst. Therefore, the writer must provide answers to the following three questions: Are the number of people riding bicycles today the same as ten years ago?, are the two surveys conducted by the same organization or different organizations? are the bicyclists initiate most of the accidents or the careless driver or the inattentive pedestrian?
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 563 350
No. of Characters: 2829 1500
No. of Different Words: 232 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.871 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.025 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.79 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 194 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 145 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 109 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 85 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.478 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.971 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.826 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.325 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.507 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.08 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 585, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...before. If this scenario has merit, the authors assertion that the carelessness of bicy...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 669, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Are
...rganization or different organizations? are the bicyclists initiate most of the acc...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, if, likewise, nevertheless, nonetheless, regarding, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, while, for example, for instance, first of all, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 29.0 19.6327345309 148% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 28.8173652695 139% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 73.0 55.5748502994 131% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 16.3942115768 55% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2901.0 2260.96107784 128% => OK
No of words: 563.0 441.139720559 128% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15275310835 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.87110059796 4.56307096286 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88494187465 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 244.0 204.123752495 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.433392539964 0.468620217663 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 919.8 705.55239521 130% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.0731391885 57.8364921388 114% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.875 119.503703932 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4583333333 23.324526521 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.875 5.70786347227 138% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.332461206208 0.218282227539 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0917161565147 0.0743258471296 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0807332002008 0.0701772020484 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.191632071755 0.128457276422 149% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0643394993037 0.0628817314937 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.3799401198 102% => 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: 12.89 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.11 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 119.0 98.500998004 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 12.3882235529 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.