The following appeared in a letter from the owner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment complex to its manager.
"One month ago, all the showerheads in the first three buildings of the Sunnyside Towers complex were modified to restrict maximum water flow to one-third of what it used to be. Although actual readings of water usage before and after the adjustment are not yet available, the change will obviously result in a considerable savings for Sunnyside Corporation, since the corporation must pay for water each month. Except for a few complaints about low water pressure, no problems with showers have been reported since the adjustment. I predict that modifying showerheads to restrict water flow throughout all twelve buildings in the Sunnyside Towers complex will increase our profits even more dramatically."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the prediction 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 prediction.
The owner’s idea of replacing the showerheads may potentially save money and even increase profits; however, currently, the claim is based on little more than speculation without evidence. Conducting research and verifying evidence before establishing a claim results in a more cogent argument. Therefore, the owner should conduct research, strengthen the claim, and provide verifiable evidence that supports the claim that using reduced flow showerheads will increase company profits.
First, establish a more persuasive claim by suggesting a hypothesis, gathering more verifiable evidence, and relying on fewer assumptions. Ascertain the city’s water usage records for the previous year, using regular flow showerheads, as a baseline for comparison to the water records of the year after, using reduced-flow fixtures. Without these records for comparison, only speculation based on a lack of evidence is possible, which is not persuasive or reasonable. Cogent reasoning relies on empirical data.
Next, cogent reasoning depends on an ideal subset to produce statistically significant results. Therefore, determine a representative sample for the twelve buildings so that the conclusions will be based on sound reasoning. A representative sample is based on a total population for all twelve buildings in the complex, not just three buildings. Ask questions such as are all of the buildings at maximum occupation or are some of the buildings unoccupied at various times throughout the year? Survey the ages and backgrounds of the residents. Gather facts such as how many showers on average each resident takes. Once the total number of consistently occupied buildings and residents per building as well as the usage patterns are gathered, determine how many showers of the twelve buildings would need to have reduced consumption showerheads to complete the study. The usage of water must be relatively similar in each building, to gather reliable statistics for water usage with and without reduced flow showerheads.
Moreover, conduct surveys of residents who are using the reduced flow showerheads to gather more information to support the claim. How many residents are happy with the new showerheads? Are they using less water, attempting to conserve more, or are they taking longer showers to compensate for the reduced flow of water? Each resident of the subset must take the survey for the sample to be statistically significant and persuasive.
With the results of the surveys and comparison of water records, formulate a reasonable claim of the feasibility of changing the showerheads in all twelve buildings to increase profits.
Finally, a responsible study produces verifiable evidence in support of the claim, concluding with evidence of increased savings from our ideal subset. In addition, a reasonable argument suggests a proposed budget that includes cost of showerhead replacement and repairs, predicting a clearer sense of the overall profits or losses for the year.
A reasonable claim, verifiable evidence, and evidence of a positive yield of funds from the study may persuade the corporation that changing to reduced flow, energy-efficient showerheads will increase company profits. More importantly, using less water will combat climate change, which is more important than company profits. Persuading both residents and the company of the importance of water conservation is necessary for the success of the new program.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-27 | thevamsi5932 | 58 | view |
| 2023-07-27 | sairaghu96 | 58 | view |
| 2023-07-26 | diya | 60 | view |
| 2023-07-13 | shubham1102 | 50 | view |
| 2023-07-11 | Jonginn | 65 | view |
- Some people believe that our ever increasing use of technology significantly reduces our opportunities for human interaction Other people believe that technology provides us with new and better ways to communicate and connect with one another Write a resp 54
- Competition for high grades seriously limits the quality of learning at all levels of education 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 deve 58
- Competition for high grades seriously limits the quality of learning at all levels of education 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 deve 66
- Competition for high grades seriously limits the quality of learning at all levels of education 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 deve 50
- The following appeared in a recommendation from the planning department of the city of Transopolis Ten years ago as part of a comprehensive urban renewal program the city of Transopolis adapted for industrial use a large area of severely substandard housi 73
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 2 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 4 2
No. of Sentences: 25 15
No. of Words: 524 350
No. of Characters: 2858 1500
No. of Different Words: 227 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.784 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.454 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.969 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 223 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 193 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 138 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 96 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.96 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.79 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.44 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.304 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.505 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.098 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 373, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...ee buildings. Ask questions such as are all of the buildings at maximum occupation or are ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 423, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
... buildings at maximum occupation or are some of the buildings unoccupied at various times t...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...twelve buildings to increase profits. Finally, a responsible study produces ve...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, if, may, moreover, so, then, therefore, well, in addition, such as, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 11.1786427146 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 9.0 28.8173652695 31% => OK
Preposition: 66.0 55.5748502994 119% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 16.3942115768 134% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2945.0 2260.96107784 130% => OK
No of words: 524.0 441.139720559 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.62022900763 5.12650576532 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.7844588288 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05308860152 2.78398813304 110% => OK
Unique words: 244.0 204.123752495 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.465648854962 0.468620217663 99% => OK
syllable_count: 920.7 705.55239521 130% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59920159681 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 4.96107784431 0% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.0027076218 57.8364921388 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.8 119.503703932 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.96 23.324526521 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.12 5.70786347227 72% => OK
Paragraphs: 7.0 5.15768463074 136% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.67664670659 214% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.118912017076 0.218282227539 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0359857929046 0.0743258471296 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0332592397539 0.0701772020484 47% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0629674235044 0.128457276422 49% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0269221227188 0.0628817314937 43% => 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: 15.5 14.3799401198 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.26 48.3550499002 71% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.5 12.197005988 111% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.32 12.5979740519 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.33 8.32208582834 112% => OK
difficult_words: 156.0 98.500998004 158% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.9071856287 134% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
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.