The argument here states that the use of a compound that prevents breaking down of neuropeptide by PEP enzymes should be extended to students who have poor memory and difficulty in concentrating. This argument fails to maintain several key factors on the basis of which it could be evaluated. To satisfy this conclusion, the author’s reason is that it will help to restore the lost memory and improve the school performance of students. However, careful scrutiny of evidence reveals that it provides little justification to the author’s conclusion. Hence, the argument is considered incomplete or unsubstantiated.
First of all, the argument readily assumes that when people got older PEP enzyme increasingly breaks down the neuropeptide chemicals involved in learning and memory. This is merely and the assumption made without much solid ground. The argument does not mention the relevant source of that statement. There can be a possibility that the argument present here is only a hunch of the author rather than reliable theory. There is also a possibility that the PEP enzymes are not responsible to break down the neuropeptide chemicals. However, the argument would have been better if it explicitly stated the theoretical statement with reliable references.
Secondly, the author argues here that it is found that the use of that compound which prevents breaking down the neuropeptide by PEP, completely restored the memory of rats. This again is a weak analogy used by the argument and it does not demonstrate the clear correlation between the test of the compound on rats and its effect on the student. The argument fails to explain how the restorations of memory on rats were measured. It also fails to explain how the PEP and its effect on neuropeptide are similar in rats and humans.
Moreover, the arguments state that use of those chemical compounds on students helps to prevent neuropeptide from deteriorating and help to perform better in school task who previously have concentration and memory problem. However, careful scrutiny of evidence reveals that it provides little support for the author’s statement in various critical aspects and raises skeptical questions. For example, what has a rate of PEP enzymes occurred in younger student and older people? How did Test make on rats? What is the reliability that one test successes on rat will be definitely success in human? Who will be responsible if those chemicals do not work properly in the student with occurring negative side effect? Without the convincing answer to these questions, the reader is left with the impression that the author’s argument is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.
In sum, the argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it further, the author must provide clear and more concrete information about the theoretical reliability of that compound and test. The anatomical similarity of rats and humans will also help to strengthen the argument. The argument should also guarantee the test is not insidious to the students.
- Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and to disobey and resist unjust laws.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure 50
- The following appeared in a memorandum to the planning department of an investment firm:"Costs have begun dropping for several types of equipment currently used to convert solar energy into electricity. Moreover, some exciting new technologies for convert 29
- The following appeared in a memorandum from the owner of Movies Galore, a chain of movie-rental stores."In order to stop the recent decline in our profits, we must reduce operating expenses at Movies Galore's ten movie-rental store 32
- "Manned space flight is costly and dangerous. Moreover, the recent success of a series of unmanned space probes and satellites has demonstrated that a great deal of useful information can be gathered without the costs and risks associated with sending men 43
- "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." - Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or dis 66
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 26 15
No. of Words: 492 350
No. of Characters: 2518 1500
No. of Different Words: 223 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.71 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.118 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.832 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 195 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 155 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 113 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 59 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.923 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.473 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.294 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.477 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.061 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, hence, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, for example, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 11.1786427146 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 22.0 13.6137724551 162% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 28.8173652695 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 64.0 55.5748502994 115% => OK
Nominalization: 26.0 16.3942115768 159% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2597.0 2260.96107784 115% => OK
No of words: 492.0 441.139720559 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.27845528455 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70967865282 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97522863413 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 228.0 204.123752495 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.463414634146 0.468620217663 99% => OK
syllable_count: 811.8 705.55239521 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.76447105788 160% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 19.7664670659 132% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 48.4906658498 57.8364921388 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.8846153846 119.503703932 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.9230769231 23.324526521 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.69230769231 5.70786347227 65% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 15.0 6.88822355289 218% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.243332983422 0.218282227539 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0691438077628 0.0743258471296 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.113179919903 0.0701772020484 161% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.143935830972 0.128457276422 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0763533270967 0.0628817314937 121% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 14.3799401198 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.34 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.44 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 122.0 98.500998004 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 12.3882235529 73% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.