The following appeared in the editorial section of a local newspaper:
“This past winter, 200 students from Waymarsh State College traveled to the state capitol
building to protest against proposed cuts in funding for various state college programs.
The other 12,000 Waymarsh students evidently weren’t so concerned about their
education: they either stayed on campus or left for winter break. Since the group who did
not protest is far more numerous, it is more representative of the state’s college students
than are the protesters. Therefore the state legislature need not heed the appeals of the
protesting students.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
The argument that state legislature didn’t heed the appeals of students because only small of proportion of Waymarsh State College protested cuts in funding is not entirely logically convincing, because it ignores certain crucial assumptions.
Firstly, the argument assumes that 200 protesting students share only minority inside of collage but actually, cutting funds occurred for various programs which affecting these 200 protesters rather than all college students. For example, State cut funding of Arts students but it didn’t matter for physics students.
Secondly, the argument never addresses reasons that why other students didn’t prefer to join protest against state council. It is surely possible that they had no information about decreases in funds. That’s why they didn’t attend in there last winter.
Finally, the arguments omits detailed decision of State legislature that explaining both causes of drops in funds and rejection of appeals. Conclusion states that less representation of students in protest as cause for needing not heed the appeals but certainly, this alone couldn’t be only reason for cutting, because State legislature dropped funds for some reason that didn’t mentioned in Author assumption.
Thus, the argument is not completely sound. The evidence in support of conclusion, students could inform their friends and all other students in Waymarsh State Collage to join their protest which as sign of solidarity between students. Additionally, students could decide a date that works for most of students of college and weather situation is also necessary which heavy snow could be reason for small number of protesters.
Ultimately, the argument might have been weakened by written critics and flaws.
- The three pie charts below show the changes in annual spending by a particular UK school in 1981, 1991 and 2001.summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparison where relevant. 72
- The following statement appeared in a consumer magazine:A fear of crime has led many homeowners to purchase monitored burglar alarmsystems, but these people are wasting their money. The primary benefit of anyburglar alarm system is one of deterrence, and 50
- The following appeared as part of an article in a weekly news magazine:“The country of Sacchar can best solve its current trade deficit problem by lowering the price of sugar, its primary export. Such an action would make Sacchar better able to compete 58
- The following appeared in the editorial section of a newspaper: “As public concern over drug abuse has increased, authorities have become more vigilant in their efforts to prevent illegal drugs from entering the country. Many drug traffickers have conse 50
- The MegaTek Corporation’s vice president of marketing made the followingstatement to the company’s board of directors:MegaTek has been losing market share to UltraCorp for three years straight.Customer surveys suggest that consumers perceive UltraCorp 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 295, Rule ID: MOST_SOME_OF_NNS[1]
Message: After 'most of', you should use 'the' ('most of the students') or simply say ''most students''.
Suggestion: most of the students; most students
...ents could decide a date that works for most of students of college and weather situation is als...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['actually', 'also', 'but', 'finally', 'first', 'firstly', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'thus', 'for example']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.306962025316 0.25644967241 120% => OK
Verbs: 0.132911392405 0.15541462614 86% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0537974683544 0.0836205057962 64% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0696202531646 0.0520304965353 134% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0221518987342 0.0272364105082 81% => OK
Prepositions: 0.148734177215 0.125424944231 119% => OK
Participles: 0.0284810126582 0.0416121511921 68% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.79510550502 2.79052419416 100% => OK
Infinitives: 0.00632911392405 0.026700313972 24% => Some infinitives wanted.
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.0569620253165 0.113004496875 50% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0126582278481 0.0255425247493 50% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0221518987342 0.0127820249294 173% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1774.0 2731.13054187 65% => OK
No of words: 264.0 446.07635468 59% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.7196969697 6.12365571057 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03089032464 4.57801047555 88% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.469696969697 0.378187486979 124% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.401515151515 0.287650121315 140% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.276515151515 0.208842608468 132% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.159090909091 0.135150697306 118% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79510550502 2.79052419416 100% => OK
Unique words: 152.0 207.018472906 73% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.575757575758 0.469332199767 123% => OK
Word variations: 59.0617686664 52.1807786196 113% => OK
How many sentences: 12.0 20.039408867 60% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.2022227129 95% => OK
Sentence length SD: 75.4379804136 57.7814097925 131% => OK
Chars per sentence: 147.833333333 141.986410481 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 23.2022227129 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.916666666667 0.724660767414 126% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.14285714286 117% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 3.58251231527 28% => OK
Readability: 62.1515151515 51.9672348444 120% => OK
Elegance: 2.15492957746 1.8405768891 117% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.412685388215 0.441005458295 94% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.106131787859 0.135418324435 78% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0688192827691 0.0829849096947 83% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.689743939268 0.58762219726 117% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.207445761264 0.147661913831 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.171190390648 0.193483328276 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0836223253179 0.0970749176394 86% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.209955945795 0.42659136922 49% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0889716745177 0.0774707102158 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.233079247924 0.312017818177 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0770940137777 0.0698173142475 110% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.33743842365 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.87684729064 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.82512315271 21% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 2.0 6.46551724138 31% => OK
Negative topic words: 9.0 5.36822660099 168% => OK
Neutral topic words: 0.0 2.82389162562 0% => More neutral topic words wanted.
Total topic words: 11.0 14.657635468 75% => 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.