The following appeared in a letter from the owner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment building to its manager.
"One month ago, all the showerheads on the first five floors of Sunnyside Towers were modified to restrict the water flow to approximately one-third of its original flow. 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. Clearly, restricting water flow throughout all the twenty floors of Sunnyside Towers will increase our profits further."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
In the letter, the owner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment building argues that inhibiting water flow all through the twenty floors of Sunnyside Towers will increase profits of the business. He bases this assertion on the potential savings resulting from the reduction in rate of water on the first five floors of the building. However, while the author’s conclusion may seem to hold water, it rests on several unfounded assumptions that, if not substantiated, dramatically weaken the cogency and persuasiveness of the argument. Thus, to full examine the proposed recommendation, the following three questions need to be answered.
First of all, does a lack of reported complaints indicate a dearth of complaints? That is, is it possible there is another possible cause for the absence of significant complaints? Perhaps there is no medium for residents to voice out their challenges to the management of Sunnyside Towers. It is also possible that the avenue for the reception of complaints is unknown to many of the residents in the building. Also, there is a possibility that a majority of residents do not stay on the first five floors of the building thereby leading to fewer complaints in general. If any of these scenarios has merit, the author’s contention is severely weakened.
Secondly, can the assertion of the author be made without any data? The author concedes that no actual readings have been made concerning the water usage before and after the adjustment was made. Perhaps there has been an increase in usage despite a decrease in the discharge rate. There is also a possibility that there has been no decrease in water flow. Due to lack of data, the argument does not have much merit. The owner of Sunnyside Towers will further strengthen his recommendation by backing it up with a research study that answers the above question.
Finally, even if there was a reduction in water usage, a lack of complaints from residents and consequently an increase in profits for the first five floors, is it logical to aver that the same will occur for the entire building? That is, are the two cases roughly comparable? Maybe there is a striking difference. It is possible water usage in the remaining fifteen floors is considerably different. Moreover, perhaps the first five floors use water for domestic purposes while the rest of the building requires it for industrial activities. It is also possible that the residents in the last fifteen floors are not benign. Perhaps a reduction in water flow will cause a deluge of complaints from those residents who may even decide to abandon the building and consequently engender a decline in profits. If any of these cases proves true, the contention of the author loses significance.
In conclusion, albeit the author’s argument may have some merit regarding the potential increase in profits of the company, more data (preferably in the form of a scientific research study) is needed for a firm conclusion to be reached. Provided the author can answer the specific questions posed above, then, it will be possible to fully evaluate the recommendation
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-19 | abjodas | 63 | view |
| 2022-09-05 | anujmore | 68 | view |
| 2022-06-01 | Ak_vido | 69 | view |
| 2021-09-07 | samuelgreprep | 60 | view |
| 2021-08-06 | saanri54321 | 58 | view |
- The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a Batavia newspaper The department of agriculture in Batavia reports that the number of dairy farms throughout the country is now 25 percent greater than it was 10 years ago During this same time period 58
- The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company According to a recent report from our marketing department during the past year fewer people attended Super Screen produced movies than in any ot 59
- 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 65
- The following appeared in a letter from the owner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment building to its manager One month ago all the showerheads on the first five floors of Sunnyside Towers were modified to restrict the water flow to approximately one third 69
- A nation should require all its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college rather than allow schools in different parts of the nation to determine which academic courses to offer 66
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: 2 2
No. of Sentences: 26 15
No. of Words: 514 350
No. of Characters: 2540 1500
No. of Different Words: 216 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.761 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.942 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.795 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 181 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 149 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 115 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 67 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.769 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.657 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.615 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.288 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.43 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.075 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, finally, first, however, if, may, moreover, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, thus, while, in conclusion, in general, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 28.8173652695 94% => OK
Preposition: 74.0 55.5748502994 133% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2610.0 2260.96107784 115% => OK
No of words: 514.0 441.139720559 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.07782101167 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.76146701107 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88659837017 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 230.0 204.123752495 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.447470817121 0.468620217663 95% => OK
syllable_count: 826.2 705.55239521 117% => 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: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 19.7664670659 132% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 53.1639197846 57.8364921388 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.384615385 119.503703932 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7692307692 23.324526521 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.96153846154 5.70786347227 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.201755988576 0.218282227539 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0531229350549 0.0743258471296 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0794885613799 0.0701772020484 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.117265235129 0.128457276422 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0984978865161 0.0628817314937 157% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 14.3799401198 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.3550499002 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.3 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 121.0 98.500998004 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => 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.