In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports among their favorite recreational activities. The mason river flowing through the city...
Allocating more money to riverside recreational facilities on the premise that a clean up of Mason River would ensure an increase in the use of the river for water sports would be highly detrimental to Mason City.
Firstly, there is no proper information as to the quality of the survey that was carried out, nor was there any indication as to when the surveys were performed. A major assumption has been made: the surveys could be outdated or the surveys may not fully represent the residents of Mason City. Even if the Surveys are credible and recent, there is no assurance that the residents of Mason City will not lose interest in water sports in the future.
The argument states that there have been complaints regarding the quality of the river's water and its smell. However this doesn't mean the residents made the complaints solely because they were considering using the river for water sports. we certainly don't know that the bad quality and bad smell was the major factor that kept the residents from using the River for water sports. For all we know, the residents may have been considering using the river's water for domestic purposes. In the event that the residents want to use the river for domestic purposes, a clean up of the river would make the residents happy as their complaint has been attended to, but this doesn't mean that the residents of Mason City would consider using the river for water sports.
In conclusion, the prompt has provided little information as to the need of the residents of Mason City. There is no conclusive evidence that a clean up of the River would incite the City dwellers to participating in water sports and so allocating more funds will not be wise.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 10 15
No. of Words: 300 350
No. of Characters: 1385 1500
No. of Different Words: 132 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.162 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.617 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.449 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 78 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 60 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 46 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 32 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 30 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.515 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.9 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.498 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.721 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.252 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 110, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...lity of the rivers water and its smell. However this doesnt mean the residents made the...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 123, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ivers water and its smell. However this doesnt mean the residents made the complaints ...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 240, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: We
...ering using the river for water sports. we certainly dont know that the bad qualit...
^^
Line 9, column 243, Rule ID: PRP_RB_NO_VB[1]
Message: Are you missing a verb?
...ng using the river for water sports. we certainly dont know that the bad quality and bad smell...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 253, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...he river for water sports. we certainly dont know that the bad quality and bad smell...
^^^^
Line 9, column 667, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...omplaint has been attended to, but this doesnt mean that the residents of Mason City w...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, may, regarding, so, well, as to, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 28.8173652695 56% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 55.5748502994 61% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 16.3942115768 43% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1420.0 2260.96107784 63% => OK
No of words: 297.0 441.139720559 67% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.78114478114 5.12650576532 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.15134772569 4.56307096286 91% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.46579612935 2.78398813304 89% => OK
Unique words: 130.0 204.123752495 64% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.43771043771 0.468620217663 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 444.6 705.55239521 63% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 19.7664670659 56% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.6356976312 57.8364921388 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.090909091 119.503703932 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.0 23.324526521 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.27272727273 5.70786347227 127% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => 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: 0.347056555374 0.218282227539 159% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.151181574575 0.0743258471296 203% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0764901028325 0.0701772020484 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.23380131998 0.128457276422 182% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0315883651915 0.0628817314937 50% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 48.3550499002 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 12.197005988 103% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.74 12.5979740519 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.01 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 98.500998004 58% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.