The following appeared as a recommendation by a committee planning a ten-year budget for the city of Calatrava.
"The birthrate in our city is declining: in fact, last year's birthrate was only one-half that of five years ago. Thus the number of students enrolled in our public schools will soon decrease dramatically, and we can safely reduce the funds budgeted for education during the next decade. At the same time, we can reduce funding for athletic playing fields and other recreational facilities. As a result, we will have sufficient money to fund city facilities and programs used primarily by adults, since we can expect the adult population of the city to increase."
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The given recommendation by a committee in the city of Calatrava states that there will be sufficient money to fund facilities and programs used by adults. Several reasons are given to corroborate this claim: birthrates, and the prospect of declining students in the area. However, upon closer analysis, the assumptions behind this argument does not provide a cogent case.
To begin with, the committee assumes that the birthrate in the city is in a downward trend. But, the only statistic information that is suggested is that last year's birthrate was only one-half compared to five years ago. This is not convincing enough, since there is a possibility that the number of new born infants would have been on the rise for the 4 years in between, which could mean that the low birthrate the previous year was a simple deviation from the trend. Under such circumstances, it would be hasty to make the presumption given above. An evidence refuting the suggested possibility is a requisite.
Not only that, do children only native to the city attend the public schools? The reading passage fails to take into account the possibility of newcomers from other regions entering the neighborhood. Students who have newly moved to Calatrava would go to the public schools, which indicate that the number of students in the city might actually rise instead of falling straight. Consider the extreme in which the city is renowned for its quality of education, consequently attracting innumerable number of families moving into the city in order to provide better schooling for their child.
Furthermore, the committee hastily jumps to the conclusion that a reduction in the number of students can help them reduce budgets spent for education. Unfortunately, this might not hold water in certain occasions. The parents could argue that since there are less children in Calatrava, the city must maintain the amount of financial support being put into facilities for students, to ensure that kids get superior level of education compared to their previous generation. If these arguments gain considerable support, the city will have no choice but to comply.
The expectation that there will be bountiful money for supporting venues used by adults may seem plausible at first glance. But, taking an in-depth look at the assumptions the argument makes allows us to reconsider the validity of the recommendation. If additional bolstering evidence is not given, the opinion is open to skepticism and doubts.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-09 | abjodas | 74 | view |
| 2023-07-29 | Umaima Khan | 68 | view |
| 2023-07-25 | Jonginn | 69 | view |
| 2023-06-20 | shubham1102 | 54 | view |
| 2022-12-19 | cbol | 50 | view |
- Laws should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances times and places Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take In developing 58
- The following appeared as a recommendation by a committee planning a ten year budget for the city of Calatrava The birthrate in our city is declining in fact last year s birthrate was only one half that of five years ago Thus the number of students enroll 69
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 6 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 4 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 404 350
No. of Characters: 2045 1500
No. of Different Words: 218 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.483 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.062 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.754 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 143 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 114 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 89 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 57 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.263 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.808 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.526 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.283 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.526 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.053 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 116, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t there will be sufficient money to fund facilities and programs used by adults. ...
^^
Line 3, column 160, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'years'' or 'year's'?
Suggestion: years'; year's
...ormation that is suggested is that last years birthrate was only one-half compared to...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 261, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun children is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...arents could argue that since there are less children in Calatrava, the city must ma...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, consequently, first, furthermore, however, if, look, may, so, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 55.5748502994 106% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2098.0 2260.96107784 93% => OK
No of words: 404.0 441.139720559 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.19306930693 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48327461151 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83912077997 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 221.0 204.123752495 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.54702970297 0.468620217663 117% => OK
syllable_count: 653.4 705.55239521 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.4585499906 57.8364921388 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.421052632 119.503703932 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2631578947 23.324526521 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.73684210526 5.70786347227 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.324597325136 0.218282227539 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0804998203102 0.0743258471296 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0997422717987 0.0701772020484 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.148673061998 0.128457276422 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.114617507942 0.0628817314937 182% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 14.3799401198 95% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.82 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.9 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 98.500998004 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.