In survey's Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating and fishing) among their favourite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devotes little of its budget to maintaining riverside recreational facilities. For years there have been complaints from residents about the quality of the river's water and the river's smell. In response, the state has recently announced plans to clean up Mason River. Use of the river for water sports is, therefore, sure to increase. The city government should for that reason devote more money in this year's budget to riverside recreational facilities.
The state's initiative for cleaning the Mason river so that it can again be used by the residents for recreational activities does sound encouraging and may be successful. The arguments cites a survey reporting that people in Mason City rank water sports among their recreational activities, however, due to the filthy river conditions they are not able to use the river for these activities. Further the argument posits that the state must allocate more money for the task of cleaning the river. However, these claims appear rash due to several logical and statistical flaws.
Firstly, the claim that the use of the river for recreational activities would increase is dependent on a survey conducted. However, the argument nowhere mentions when was the survey conducted. Since people's complaints about the river have been ignored by the authorities for several years, it might be possible that the residents may have found another place where they could enjoy such activities.
Secondly, it might be possible that over the years people's interests may have changed for swimming, boating or fishing to other recreational activities due to lack of access to the river for some years. In this case starting the cleaning process for making the river fit for such activities might go in vain.
Thirdly, the claim asking the city government to allocate more money for cleaning the river might be too rash. Since the city park department was allocating a little chunk of its budget it might be the case that there might be some surplus money in other projects that might be useful to fund the river cleaning exercise. It may also be the case that cleaning of the river may not require more money and could be done under the existing amount of funds.
Overall, the argument made may be untrustworthy and may lead to inefficient decisions. The claim assuring the use of Mason River for recreational activities could be made stronger by redoing a survey to get a perception of the current interests of the residents in the mentioned recreational activities. In addition to this, a proper budget must be made keeping in mind the projected costs for cleaning the river. Following this, a report comprising of the current surplus funds with the city park department must be created to get a hold of whether any more money is needed for the project. All this being done, an informed decision and action plan must be proposed that would guide the river cleaning project.
- In survey s Mason City residents rank water sports swimming boating and fishing among their favourite recreational activities The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits however and the city park department devotes little of 53
- Every individual in a society has the responsibility to obey laws and to disobey and resist unjust laws 62
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely decrease 83
- Collectors prize the ancient life size clay statues of human figures made on Kali Island but have long wondered how Kalinese artists were able to depict bodies with such realistic precision Since archeologists have recently discovered molds of human heads 60
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 413 350
No. of Characters: 2011 1500
No. of Different Words: 183 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.508 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.869 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.554 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 126 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 104 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 75 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 44 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.294 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.81 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.647 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.379 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.589 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.118 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 186, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[1]
Message: You should probably use 'cite'.
Suggestion: cite
...ng and may be successful. The arguments cites a survey reporting that people in Mason...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 112, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Since” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...r cleaning the river might be too rash. Since the city park department was allocating...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 440, Rule ID: COMPRISING_OF[1]
Message: Did you mean 'comprising' or 'consisting of'?
Suggestion: comprising; consisting of
...ing the river. Following this, a report comprising of the current surplus funds with the city...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, however, may, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 24.0 12.9520958084 185% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 55.5748502994 72% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 16.3942115768 49% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2054.0 2260.96107784 91% => OK
No of words: 413.0 441.139720559 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.97336561743 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50803742585 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61826091795 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 204.123752495 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.450363196126 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 633.6 705.55239521 90% => 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: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.9823906094 57.8364921388 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.823529412 119.503703932 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.2941176471 23.324526521 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 5.70786347227 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.262376251861 0.218282227539 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.09987290106 0.0743258471296 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0866110687213 0.0701772020484 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.166494247848 0.128457276422 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0717975801815 0.0628817314937 114% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.3799401198 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.3550499002 115% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.85 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 98.500998004 80% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => 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.