In the memo, the director of a large group of hospitals concludes that the hospitals should fill all hand-washing stations with UltraClean hand soap instead of their current liquid hand soap since using this hand soap results in fewer cases of patients infected in one of the hospitals in their groups, and also this new hand soap produces a 40 percent reduction in deleterious bacteria than the current hand soap they use. Nonetheless, while the conclusion drawn by the director might hold water, it rests on several unfounded assumptions that, if not substantiated, dramatically weaken the persuasiveness of the argument. Thus, the author must provide the following three pieces of evidence.
First of all, it is probable that the fewer cases of infection at Worktown hospital, the hospital that currently uses UltraClean hand soap, coincides with other factors. For instance, it is possible that hospital nurses, doctors, or visitors pay more attention to hygienic matters than other branches. , If the director wants to make this pronounced change in all hospitals, he must test it at at least two more hospitals and then make the final decision. If this scenario has merit, then the director's assertion that this new soap is better than the old one due to a reduction in patients' infection in Worktown hospital is significantly hampered.
Secondly, the director provides no evidence regarding the price of the new hand soap. The cost of this new hand soap might be notably greater than the regular hand soap they use currently. If the price gap between these two hand soaps is noticeable so the director must not make his final decision without considering the expenses that this change might impose on the system. The unaffordable price of this new hand soap might result in the bankruptcy of the hospitals. The writer's argument does not hold water if the above is true.
Finally, the director did not make any difference between doctors, nurses, and visitors. Each of these groups visits patients on various basis. For instance, nurses might visit patients more than twice a day, a visitor might visit the patients once a week, and doctors may see them every two days. Consequently, those people who visit patients more frequently, in this case, the nurses, should only use this new liquid, not all the doctors and visitors. So, the director must provide evidence concerning the impact of the frequency of visitors on patient infection. If it is true that the only persons having the most contact with the patients are more likely to transmit any kind of infection to the patients, the credibility of the writer's claim decreases substantially.
To recapitulate, it is possible that equipping all the hand-washing stations at all the hospitals in this system results in a decrease in patients infection. Nevertheless, as it stands now, it relies on three groundless assumptions that render its conclusion unpersuasive at best and specious at worst. Therefore, the author has to provide additional evidence on three fronts: other factors might that be contributed to the result gained from the Worktown hospital, the affordability of this new hand soap, and the effect of the number of times that people visit the patients on patients susceptibility to get infected.
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 303, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...o hygienic matters than other branches. , If the director wants to make this pron...
^
Line 3, column 392, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: at
...hange in all hospitals, he must test it at at least two more hospitals and then make ...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 494, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'directors'' or 'director's'?
Suggestion: directors'; director's
...n. If this scenario has merit, then the directors assertion that this new soap is better ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 475, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
...in the bankruptcy of the hospitals. The writers argument does not hold water if the abo...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 580, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'patients'' or 'patient's'?
Suggestion: patients'; patient's
...times that people visit the patients on patients susceptibility to get infected.
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, finally, first, if, may, nevertheless, nonetheless, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, while, as to, at least, for instance, kind of, first of all, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.6327345309 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 43.0 28.8173652695 149% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 69.0 55.5748502994 124% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2747.0 2260.96107784 121% => OK
No of words: 536.0 441.139720559 122% => OK
Chars per words: 5.125 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.81161862636 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79999321305 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 246.0 204.123752495 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.458955223881 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 827.1 705.55239521 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.76447105788 160% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 84.4209837323 57.8364921388 146% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.80952381 119.503703932 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5238095238 23.324526521 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.71428571429 5.70786347227 170% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => 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: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.268515980884 0.218282227539 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0791124748413 0.0743258471296 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0969324034576 0.0701772020484 138% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.171541207458 0.128457276422 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.125410254739 0.0628817314937 199% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 14.3799401198 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 48.3550499002 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.77 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.38 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 119.0 98.500998004 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 28.0 12.3882235529 226% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 303, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...o hygienic matters than other branches. , If the director wants to make this pron...
^
Line 3, column 392, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: at
...hange in all hospitals, he must test it at at least two more hospitals and then make ...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 494, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'directors'' or 'director's'?
Suggestion: directors'; director's
...n. If this scenario has merit, then the directors assertion that this new soap is better ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 475, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
...in the bankruptcy of the hospitals. The writers argument does not hold water if the abo...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 580, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'patients'' or 'patient's'?
Suggestion: patients'; patient's
...times that people visit the patients on patients susceptibility to get infected.
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, finally, first, if, may, nevertheless, nonetheless, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, while, as to, at least, for instance, kind of, first of all, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.6327345309 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 43.0 28.8173652695 149% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 69.0 55.5748502994 124% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2747.0 2260.96107784 121% => OK
No of words: 536.0 441.139720559 122% => OK
Chars per words: 5.125 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.81161862636 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79999321305 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 246.0 204.123752495 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.458955223881 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 827.1 705.55239521 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.76447105788 160% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 84.4209837323 57.8364921388 146% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.80952381 119.503703932 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5238095238 23.324526521 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.71428571429 5.70786347227 170% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => 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: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.268515980884 0.218282227539 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0791124748413 0.0743258471296 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0969324034576 0.0701772020484 138% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.171541207458 0.128457276422 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.125410254739 0.0628817314937 199% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 14.3799401198 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 48.3550499002 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.77 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.38 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 119.0 98.500998004 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 28.0 12.3882235529 226% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.