In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating and fishing) among their favorite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devotes littl

Essay topics:

In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating and fishing) among their favorite 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.

Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on the assumptions and what the implications are if the assumptions prove unwarranted.

The assumption that people who rank water sports "among their favorite recreational activities" are actually likely to participate in them. (It is possible that they just like to watch them.) This assumption underlies the claim that use of the river for water sports is sure to increase after the state cleans up the Mason River and that the city should for that reason devote more money to riverside recreational facilities.

The assumption that the park department's devoting little of its budget to maintaining riverside recreational facilities means that these facilities are inadequately maintained. This assumption underlies the claim that the city should devote more money in this year's budget to riverside recreational facilities. If current facilities are adequately maintained, then increased funding might not be needed even if recreational use of the river does increase.

The assumption that the dirtiness of the river is the cause of its being little used and that cleaning up the river will be sufficient to increase recreational use of the river. (Residents might have complained about the water quality and smell even if they had no desire to boat, swim or fish in the river.) This assumption underlies the claim that the state's plan to clean up the river will result in increased use of the river for water sports.

The assumption that the state's clean-up will occur soon enough to require adjustments to this year's budget. This assumption underlies the claim that the city should devote more money in this year's budget to riverside recreational facilities.

The assumption that the clean-up, when it happens, will benefit those parts of the river accessible from the city's facilities. This assumption underlies the claim that the city should devote more money to riverside recreational facilities.

Votes
Average: 5 (1 vote)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2020-01-29 jason123 66 view
2020-01-26 jason123 59 view
2020-01-20 Ammu helen 16 view
2020-01-17 ramji90 82 view
2020-01-13 shekhawat24 49 view
Essay Categories
Essays by user Saikumar :

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 110, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'facilities'' or 'facility's'?
Suggestion: facilities'; facility's
...t to maintaining riverside recreational facilities means that these facilities are inadequ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 256, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...at the city should devote more money in this years budget to riverside recreational ...
^^^^
Line 7, column 187, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...at the city should devote more money in this years budget to riverside recreational ...
^^^^

Discourse Markers used:
['actually', 'if', 'so', 'then']

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.262820512821 0.25644967241 102% => OK
Verbs: 0.166666666667 0.15541462614 107% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0737179487179 0.0836205057962 88% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0320512820513 0.0520304965353 62% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0288461538462 0.0272364105082 106% => OK
Prepositions: 0.121794871795 0.125424944231 97% => OK
Participles: 0.0288461538462 0.0416121511921 69% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.88989695527 2.79052419416 104% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0416666666667 0.026700313972 156% => OK
Particles: 0.00961538461538 0.001811407834 531% => OK
Determiners: 0.144230769231 0.113004496875 128% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0320512820513 0.0255425247493 125% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00641025641026 0.0127820249294 50% => OK

Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1829.0 2731.13054187 67% => OK
No of words: 289.0 446.07635468 65% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.32871972318 6.12365571057 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12310562562 4.57801047555 90% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.339100346021 0.378187486979 90% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.245674740484 0.287650121315 85% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.221453287197 0.208842608468 106% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.190311418685 0.135150697306 141% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88989695527 2.79052419416 104% => OK
Unique words: 119.0 207.018472906 57% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.411764705882 0.469332199767 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 38.9510372732 52.1807786196 75% => OK
How many sentences: 13.0 20.039408867 65% => OK
Sentence length: 22.2307692308 23.2022227129 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.1280292854 57.7814097925 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.692307692 141.986410481 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2307692308 23.2022227129 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.307692307692 0.724660767414 42% => More Discourse Markers wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 3.58251231527 84% => OK
Readability: 46.7982432792 51.9672348444 90% => OK
Elegance: 1.81690140845 1.8405768891 99% => OK

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.345557054175 0.441005458295 78% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.200392094415 0.135418324435 148% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0885918726998 0.0829849096947 107% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.711236648217 0.58762219726 121% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.137748101169 0.147661913831 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.180514762274 0.193483328276 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0812114305732 0.0970749176394 84% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.505056145693 0.42659136922 118% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0672183306136 0.0774707102158 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.249755527984 0.312017818177 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0686206734103 0.0698173142475 98% => OK

Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.33743842365 132% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 6.87684729064 15% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.82512315271 21% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 11.0 6.46551724138 170% => OK
Negative topic words: 1.0 5.36822660099 19% => More negative topic words wanted.
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.82389162562 35% => OK
Total topic words: 13.0 14.657635468 89% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

---------------------
More content wanted. For issue essays, around 450 words, for argument essays, around 400 words.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.