The following appeared as a letter to the editor from the owner of a skate shop in Central Plaza.
"Two years ago the city voted to prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. They claimed that skateboard users were responsible for the litter and vandalism that were keeping other visitors from coming to the plaza. In the past two years, however, there has only been a small increase in the number of visitors to Central Plaza, and litter and vandalism are still problematic. Skateboarding is permitted in Monroe Park, however, and there is no problem with litter or vandalism there. In order to restore Central Plaza to its former glory, then, we recommend that the city lift its prohibition on skateboarding in the plaza."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The owner of skate shop recommends lifting ban on skateboarding at Central Plaza as it did not prevent litter and vandalism and compares it with the situation at Monroe Park where skateboarding is allowed.This argument is not entirely logically convincing, since it lacks crucial information and evidences to support the argument.
The skate shop owner compares situation at Monroe Park with Central Plaza and recommends that since it did not cause any litter or vandalism problem in Monroe Park it will have the same effect at Central Plaza. While stating this the author fails to take into consideration that Monroe Park might have very small population of people who skateboard to the plaza. It is also possible that the Monroe Park is located in better part of the town which has high education level and low un-employment rates while Central Plaza has totally opposite situation. In such situations allowing skateboarding would not make any difference as both the plaza represent totally difference scenarios and the owner needs to take the above factors into consideration.
The shop owner also mentions that in-spite banning skateboard users the problem of litter and vandalism and low number of visitors has not been solved. Unemployment and low education level plays important role here too as people in this part of town are un-employed and do not have money to spend which can lead to low visitors as well as litter and vandalism. There is also a possibility that lot of stores in this plaza are closed or there are not enough variety of stores which can lead to low visitors too. There is also possibility that new competition has opened nearby which had more variety of stores and has lower prices than Central Plaza. But it is clear that banning skateboarding had no effect on the reasons why it was banned.
One important thing to note here is that this letter was written by a skate shop owner so it is possible that he is going to be more declined towards lifting the ban on skateboarding as that will increase the sales of the shop and be beneficial for the shop. So the owner needs to take opinion of all the store owners and then come up with a recommendation based on that.
Allowing skateboards can increase the number of visitors as in today’s time people want to save money and gas and use alternative methods and also there is no concrete relation between skateboarders and litter and vandalism. The owner should look into increasing the security at the plaza and install security camera's which would lower the rate of vandalism and litter and would make people feel safe and increase the number of visitors too.
To conclude the owner needs to look into above mentioned scenarios and present a stronger and detailed recommendation as it is clear the problem was not solved by banning skateboarding and lifting the ban would make any difference.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017-07-27 | roncy | view | |
| 2015-12-15 | grehelp100 | 50 | view |
| 2015-11-07 | negin papen | 40 | view |
Let's analyze the structure of the statement and argue accordingly:
condition 1:
In the past two years, however, there has only been a small increase in the number of visitors to Central Plaza, and litter and vandalism are still problematic. //but if the city lift its prohibition on skateboarding in the plaza, there may be even less increase in the number of visitors to Central Plaza, and more litter and vandalism.
condition 2:
Skateboarding is permitted in Monroe Park, however, and there is no problem with litter or vandalism there. //your argument 1 OK
conclusion:
In order to restore Central Plaza to its former glory, then, we recommend that the city lift its prohibition on skateboarding in the plaza. //first, skateboarding may have negative effects; second, suppose skateboarding will improve the business, it doesn't mean the plaza can restore the business to its former glory; third, there are other factors for business.
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 15 15
No. of Words: 490 350
No. of Characters: 2361 1500
No. of Different Words: 201 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.705 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.818 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.656 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 150 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 114 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 80 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 51 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 32.667 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.582 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.8 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.373 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.664 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.161 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5