The argument presented suggests that including more call-in advice programs will obtain larger audience. The argument appears to be relatively sound at first glance. However, on analysis, it is easy to see that the argument suffers from several grave fallacies. The argument is dubious; it rests on a questionable analogy and bases his argument on unwarranted assumption. A stand can be taken only after careful examination of the questions to be answered by the argument.
To begin with, the argument presented relies on a success that happened two years ago in a different radio stations at different cities; this premise in itself lacks clarity. The argument does not answer any question as to why WCQP decided to introduce call-in advice programs. Maybe they had no other programs in their station or the programs they had might not be doing well. The argument simply assumes that the significant increment is only because of the call-in advice program. The significant rise might have been due to the population growth at that time or the listeners growing interest in other programs at that time. Also, the argument fails to quantify the significant increment. It does not state increment from how many, does the significant increase refer to increase from zero? If so, then WCQP must be a new station. Hence, these questions regarding WCQP must be answered.
Moreover, the argument presents the nationwide survey as a substantial evidence for WCQP’s success. The argument lacks clarity and does not provide enough information about the survey. We do not know anything about the methods used for the survey, neither sample size nor the survey population has been disclosed. Simply stating nationwide survey makes the survey more ambiguous. Whether the survey can represent all the radio listeners and their unbiased view on it is questionable from the information provided in the argument. In addition, only the opinions of the listeners of WCQP can be considered even among the nationwide survey. Most importatly for a survey to be reliable the total number of survey population and total number of listeners of call-in advice program of WCQP, Rockville must be (have been?) stated clearly.
Last but not least, the author commits faulty analogy by assuming that these two cities Rockville and Medway are similar. There are umpteen of reasons that this analogy can go wrong. To state few; the listeners from both the cities might have completely different taste. What if the listeners from Medway are not into call-in advice and wants more entertaining contents. What about the popularity of these two radio stations. It is stated nowhere in the argument if WCQP is popular than KICK or not. If that is the case then, KICK is less likely to gain larger audience just by including call-in advice programs. What worked for WCQP might not work for the KICK for various. Thus, the author must make sure that the listeners of these radio stations are similar in every way to claim that call-in advice programs will be a roaring success when they are implemented by KICK radio station.
Thus, the author needs vigorous research and clarification to improve the argument significantly. If the author truly hopes for the success through call-in advice programs he must logically fix the flaws and explain the assumptions. Hence, without working on the evidences and facts, it does not persuade that increasing call-in advice programs will gain larger audiences.
- Many other companies have recently stated that having their employees take the Easy Read Speed Reading Course has greatly improved productivity One graduate of the course was able to read a 500 page report in only two hours another graduate rose from an a 60
- Two years ago radio station WCQP in Rockville decided to increase the number of call in advice programs that it broadcast since that time its share of the radio audience in the Rockville listening area has increased significantly Given WCQP s recent s 79
- All cities should devote at least five percent of their budgets to programs that preserve and protect existing parks 66
- Originality does not mean thinking something that was never thought before it means putting old ideas together in new ways 70
- In business education and government it is always appropriate to remain skeptical of new leaders until those leaders show that they are worthy of trust Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim In devel 50
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 9 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 4 2
No. of Sentences: 33 15
No. of Words: 566 350
No. of Characters: 2835 1500
No. of Different Words: 248 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.878 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.009 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.538 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 215 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 166 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 112 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 59 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.152 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.706 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.545 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.291 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.464 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.122 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 108, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'station'?
Suggestion: station
...ened two years ago in a different radio stations at different cities; this premise in it...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 815, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Stated
...m of WCQP, Rockville must be have been? stated clearly. Last but not least, the au...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 20, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...? stated clearly. Last but not least, the author commits faulty analogy by ass...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, however, if, may, moreover, regarding, so, then, thus, well, as to, in addition, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 72.0 55.5748502994 130% => OK
Nominalization: 34.0 16.3942115768 207% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2907.0 2260.96107784 129% => OK
No of words: 566.0 441.139720559 128% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13604240283 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.87757670434 4.56307096286 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61161641018 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 260.0 204.123752495 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.459363957597 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 894.6 705.55239521 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 15.0 8.76447105788 171% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 33.0 19.7664670659 167% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.5198059137 57.8364921388 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.0909090909 119.503703932 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.1515151515 23.324526521 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.60606060606 5.70786347227 63% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 8.20758483034 183% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.268224138909 0.218282227539 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0640431266435 0.0743258471296 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0533979326462 0.0701772020484 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.145658019158 0.128457276422 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0833235928496 0.0628817314937 133% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 14.3799401198 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.3550499002 112% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.83 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 98.500998004 122% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.