The author of the statement, the parents of Kensington school students, asserts that the school should replace Swift Nutrition, the private vendor of school, to prohibit the severe health consequences for students. However, the author relies on unjustified assumptions that could not be taken for granted; Thus, the following essay will address the author's assumptions and request several answers to strengthen or weaken the author's argument.
Firstly, the author assumes that students do not like to eat low-fat, low-calorie meals. It could be plausible to see students who usually want to eat instant foods, junk foods, or something like this. However, the author should not generalize that all students hate to eat healthy meals. The author provides their sons and several his friends' opinions as to the instance of complaint of Swift; however, it is not sufficient to conclude that all students are the same as their sons and his friends. Thus, the questions about the opinions of the majority of students of Kensington Academy should be answered to verify the argument.
Secondly, the author presumes that if the school does not change its private vendor, Swift, students will bring foods for them, which are more deleterious to their health. However, no one could guarantee these consequences. Because the Kensington Academy is a private school, thus average parents whose income cannot afford the tuition of the private school do not choose this school. Relatively high-class parents would be likely to take care of their kid's meal. They would not allow their children to eat less health lunches even if kids hate the cafeteria foods. Therefore, to assess the author's argument, the author has to present the response of students' parents in case that their kids do not want to eat at the cafeteria.
Lastly, the author thinks that Swift will provide its students with less tasty foods every day. Even though the private vendor made some distasteful foods, and it had students brought food for themselves, the possibility that Swift will change their policy exists. If parents and students give feedback on their meals to Swift, the company could differentiate their foods to satisfy their students. The author concludes that the school should replace their cafeteria company based on just yesterday's complaints of their sons and his friends, and there is no enough time to access the Swift's performance which is changed last year. Thus, the author should answer the questions pertaining to the overall feedbacks, performances, and the possibilities of change.
In sum, the author worries about students' health problems and gives advice to the school to replace their cafeteria company. The arguments based on the opinions of students; however, it depends on unjustified assumptions. Thus, the author has to answers about the students' and parents' views and the response of the Swift to strengthen the argument.
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government industry or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation not competition 70
- Although sound moral judgment is an important characteristic of an effective leader it is not as important as a leader s ability to maintain the respect of his or her peers 66
- For many years all the stores in our chain have stocked a wide variety of both domestic and imported cheeses Last year however all of the five best selling cheeses at our newest store were domestic cheddar cheeses from Wisconsin Furthermore a recent 58
- A recent sales study indicates that consumption of seafood dishes in Bay City restaurants has increased by 30 percent during the past five years Yet there are no currently operating city restaurants whose specialty is seafood Moreover the majority of 58
- The surest indicator of a great nation is represented not by the achievements of its rulers artists or scientists but by the general welfare of its people 83
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: 21 15
No. of Words: 468 350
No. of Characters: 2394 1500
No. of Different Words: 195 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.651 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.115 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.505 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 193 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 138 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 84 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 45 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.286 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.212 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.714 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.363 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.532 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.107 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 427, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ral answers to strengthen or weaken the authors argument. Firstly, the author assumes...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 593, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...feteria foods. Therefore, to assess the authors argument, the author has to present the...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, however, if, lastly, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 19.6327345309 51% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 28.8173652695 132% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 52.0 55.5748502994 94% => 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: 2454.0 2260.96107784 109% => OK
No of words: 468.0 441.139720559 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.24358974359 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65116196802 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58483781207 2.78398813304 93% => OK
Unique words: 209.0 204.123752495 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.446581196581 0.468620217663 95% => OK
syllable_count: 705.6 705.55239521 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 19.0 8.76447105788 217% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => 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: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.2274193125 57.8364921388 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.857142857 119.503703932 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2857142857 23.324526521 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.14285714286 5.70786347227 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.263687847668 0.218282227539 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0865043829211 0.0743258471296 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0788253642243 0.0701772020484 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.158638491471 0.128457276422 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0470420237707 0.0628817314937 75% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 14.3799401198 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.3550499002 119% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.41 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.97 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 98.500998004 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4 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.