The following appeared in an editorial in a local newspaper.
"Commuters complain that increased rush-hour traffic on Blue Highway between the suburbs and the city center has doubled their commuting time. The favored proposal of the motorists' lobby is to widen the highway, adding an additional lane of traffic. Opponents note that last year's addition of a lane to the nearby Green Highway was followed by a worsening of traffic jams on it. Their suggested alternative proposal is adding a bicycle lane to Blue Highway. Many area residents are keen bicyclists. A bicycle lane would encourage them to use bicycles to commute, it is argued, thereby reducing rush-hour traffic."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The author argues here that adding a bicycle lane to Blue highway is a successful alternative to rush-hour traffic. Stated in this way, the argument fails to mention several key factors on the basis it could be evaluated. On the support of this suggestion, the author cites that adding new bicycle lane would encourage residents to use bicycle to commute. However, careful scrutiny of evidence reveals it provide little credible support to the author's conclusion. Hence, the argument can be considered incomplete and unsubstantiated.
First of all, The argument readily assumes that widening the highway the year before causes more problems as opponents said. This is merely an assumption made with much solid ground. For example, the author did not mention how many people complaints about that. May one or two individuals make the same complaints. The argument would have much more convincing if there is an on-site survey to examine these complaints. If the complaints are true, there may be some other reasons. For example, the behavior of vehicles drives. There should be
Secondly, the author points out that many area residents are keen bicyclists. This again a weak and unsupported claim.as it didn't mention the exact number of residents who are keen bicyclists. The word "many" is a vague word. How does the author know that many of them are keen to use bicycles? If this is true, why they are using other vehicles while this is a cheaper one? If the argument had provided evidence that they are keen to use bicycles, it would have been much more convincing.
Finally, the author cites that adding a new bicycle lane to the highway will encourage residents to use bicycles. This raises skeptical questions. For example, is adding new lane only enough to encourage them to use their bicycles? Is using their bicycles enough to solve the rush-hour traffic? Without convincing answers to these questions, the reader is left with the impression that the author's conclusion is only a wishful thinking.
In conclusion, the argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it further, the author needs to provide concrete evidence. Perhaps by way of detailed analysis. To evaluate it better, the author should provide more information about the residents and their behavior.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-15 | p30kh40 | 63 | view |
| 2019-11-26 | Nithin Narla | 73 | view |
| 2019-11-16 | PRABINADHIKARI45 | 55 | view |
| 2019-11-03 | Yongrok_Jeong | 63 | view |
| 2019-11-02 | OliverRaab | 55 | view |
- The following appeared in an editorial in a local newspaper."Commuters complain that increased rush-hour traffic on Blue Highway between the suburbs and the city center has doubled their commuting time. The favored proposal of the motorists' lobby is to w 16
- Governments should not fund any scientific research whose consequences are unclear.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing 50
- The following appeared in a magazine article about planning for retirement."Clearview should be a top choice for anyone seeking a place to retire, because it has spectacular natural beauty and a consistent climate. Another advantage is that housing costs 66
- Society should make efforts to save endangered species only if the potential extinction of those species is the result of human activities.Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. 58
- Governments should offer a free university education to any student who has been admitted to a university but who cannot afford the tuition.Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 406, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'provides'?
Suggestion: provides
...careful scrutiny of evidence reveals it provide little credible support to the authors ...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 445, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... provide little credible support to the authors conclusion. Hence, the argument can be ...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 541, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...vior of vehicles drives. There should be Secondly, the author points out that man...
^^^
Line 3, column 125, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...gain a weak and unsupported claim.as it didnt mention the exact number of residents w...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 390, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...er is left with the impression that the authors conclusion is only a wishful thinking. ...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 180, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'betters', 'wells'?
Suggestion: betters; wells
...ay of detailed analysis. To evaluate it better, the author should provide more informa...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, hence, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, while, for example, in conclusion, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 32.0 28.8173652695 111% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 55.5748502994 68% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1920.0 2260.96107784 85% => OK
No of words: 374.0 441.139720559 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.13368983957 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.3976220399 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74091690284 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 204.123752495 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.497326203209 0.468620217663 106% => OK
syllable_count: 603.0 705.55239521 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Interrogative: 2.0 0.471057884232 425% => OK
Article: 15.0 8.76447105788 171% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 19.7664670659 137% => OK
Sentence length: 13.0 22.8473053892 57% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 30.6376674482 57.8364921388 53% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 71.1111111111 119.503703932 60% => More chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 13.8518518519 23.324526521 59% => More words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 4.07407407407 5.70786347227 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.20758483034 171% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => 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: 0.0697508869394 0.218282227539 32% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0217227291667 0.0743258471296 29% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0438615509846 0.0701772020484 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0396869605587 0.128457276422 31% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0165393489265 0.0628817314937 26% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.7 14.3799401198 67% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.28 48.3550499002 121% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 12.197005988 69% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.88 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.04 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 98.500998004 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.2 11.1389221557 65% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.9071856287 67% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
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 -- 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: 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.