It seems to be logical, at first glance, to agree with the city should change the policy of prohibition on skateboarding in the plaza. However, the author of this argument relies on a couple of less credible evidence or even doubtful assumption to consolidate his stance. In what follows, I will elaborate on them in details.
The first problem according to the argument is that it concludes on unrepresentative statistical results. The author refers to the survey but does not specify the size of the target population. According to the statistical theories, the greater the proportion of sample to target size, the results are more reliable. So, the reliability of this survey is questionable.
The second problem with this argument is that the writer presumes unfairly that object remains the same over the time. He says that the number of visitors to Central Plaza has not changed due to this prohibition. It is not true due to the fact that this might have other sources such that people prefer going to the other plaza, and their taste is changed by the time.
In order to fully evaluate this argument, we need to have a significant amount of additional evidence before accepting or refuse it completely. The first piece of evidence we need to know more about, then analysis, is that the editor has to propose the percent of the decrease in the number of skateboarders due to that policy. In addition, to better to assess the argument, we need to know about the evidence that shows other elements do not change people desire, and this prohibition is the only factor.
To consolidate, despite the argument suffers from several problems and is unconvincing, but we cannot rely on it or refuse it without perusing any additional assumptions and reasoning. The author can strengthen his stance by changing states referred to the mentioned solutions. Without these changes, this argument is implausible and the reasoning is faulty.
- Two years ago the city council voted to prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. They claimed that skateboard users were responsible for litter and vandalism that were keeping other visitors from coming to the plaza. In the past two years, however, there 12
- Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central Plaza store owners believe that the decrease in their business is due to the numbe 35
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. 50
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: 16 15
No. of Words: 324 350
No. of Characters: 1572 1500
No. of Different Words: 165 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.243 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.852 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.726 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 121 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 82 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 59 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 32 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.25 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.603 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.562 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.31 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.59 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.129 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, second, so, then, as to, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.6327345309 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 34.0 28.8173652695 118% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 55.5748502994 101% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1623.0 2260.96107784 72% => OK
No of words: 324.0 441.139720559 73% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.00925925926 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24264068712 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82968477259 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 204.123752495 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.521604938272 0.468620217663 111% => OK
syllable_count: 516.6 705.55239521 73% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.22255489022 237% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => 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: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.2325247074 57.8364921388 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.4375 119.503703932 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.25 23.324526521 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.8125 5.70786347227 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => 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: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0902167350408 0.218282227539 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0290413537878 0.0743258471296 39% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0448573311482 0.0701772020484 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0508985335309 0.128457276422 40% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0431962202254 0.0628817314937 69% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 14.3799401198 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.97 8.32208582834 108% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 98.500998004 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.