Fifteen years ago, Omega University implemented a new procedure that encouraged students to evaluate the teaching effectiveness of all their professors. Since that time, Omega professors have begun to assign higher grades in their classes, and overall student grade averages at Omega have risen by 30 percent. Potential employers, looking at this dramatic rise in grades, believe that grades at Omega are inflated and do not accurately reflect student achievement; as a result, Omega graduates have not been as successful at getting jobs as have graduates from nearby Alpha University. To enable its graduates to secure better jobs, Omega University should terminate student evaluation of professors.’
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 author’s argument that Omega University should terminate student evaluation of professors to enable its graduates to secure better jobs is flawed for various reasons. The author not only draws a strong conclusion based on vague and unwarranted statements, but also relies on a sample of employers beliefs. Furthermore, the author does not try to analyse the real reason for the failure of Omega graduates in getting jobs, but instead concludes that the student evaluation is the reason for failure which is incorrect.
First, the author concludes firmly based on vague and unwarranted statements which are incorrect. For example, the author does not define the meaning of potential employers in the context of recruiting the graduates. If the potential employers mean high paying employers who hire only one or two graduates, it would not be wise to change the student evaluation policy based on their beliefs, and it would not impact the number of graduates who can get jobs. If the potential employers mean the employers who recruit almost half of the graduates from Omega University, it might be helpful in changing the Omega University policies. If the author had mentioned the meaning of potential employers, it would be easy to conclude that Omega University can ameliorate the situation by removing the student evaluation policy.
Second, the author concludes that all the employers are having the same belief that the grades of Omega University are inflated based on the sample of employers he considers. The underlying assumption is that the sample of employers represents all the employers of the graduates from Omega University which is unwarranted. The assumption is flawed because the author does not cite how he considered the sample of employers and how this sample of employers represents all the employers. For example, if the sample of employers has the belief of inflated grades who constitute only 1 percent of all the employers, it is unwise to conclude that all the employers have the same belief and changing the policy of student evaluation will change their opinion. Because the author does not provide information on how he chose the sample of employers, it is impossible to conclude based on the sample of employers.
Third, the author does not try to evaluate the real reason for the failure of Omega University graduates in securing jobs, but instead concludes that the student evaluation of professors has caused the inflation of grades which in turn caused the failure which is unwarranted. The conclusion is invalid because the author does not provide any information which supports that student evaluation of professors is the reason for the failure of Omega university graduates. The underlying assumption is that the real reason would not provide any extra information in analysing the situation which is incorrect. For example, if the reason for the failure is because of the degraded quality of education in Omega University or the recession in job opportunities which are not related to the student evaluation policy, it is not correct to conclude that removing the student evaluation policy would ameliorate the situation. If the author had analysed the real reason for the drop in recruitments of Omega University graduates, it would have been easy to conclude whether removing the student evaluation policy would make any change in the recruitments of Omega University graduates.
In conclusion, Because the argument makes several unwarranted assumptions, the author fails to make a convincing case that Omega University should terminate student evaluation of professors to enable its graduates to secure better jobs is flawed for various reasons.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-25 | tomlee0205 | 66 | view |
| 2023-05-26 | shubham1102 | 60 | view |
| 2022-10-10 | fangzr2 | 58 | view |
| 2022-08-17 | devansh66 | 66 | view |
| 2022-08-17 | devansh66 | 66 | view |
- The best way to teach is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones. 66
- Fifteen years ago, Omega University implemented a new procedure that encouraged students to evaluate the teaching effectiveness of all their professors. Since that time, Omega professors have begun to assign higher grades in their classes, and overall stu 30
- Society should identify those children who have special talents and provide training for them at an early age to develop their talents. 58
- Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field. 58
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. 66
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- not OK
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
correct way:
argument 1:
Fifteen years ago, Omega University implemented a new procedure that encouraged students to evaluate the teaching effectiveness of all their professors. Since that time, Omega professors have begun to assign higher grades in their classes, and overall student grade averages at Omega have risen by 30 percent. //maybe the university got better students
argument 2:
Potential employers, looking at this dramatic rise in grades, believe that grades at Omega are inflated and do not accurately reflect student achievement; as a result, Omega graduates have not been as successful at getting jobs as have graduates from nearby Alpha University. //maybe other reasons cause less jobs
argument 3:
To enable its graduates to secure better jobs, Omega University should terminate student evaluation of professors. //maybe the evaluation system works pretty well.
--------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 590 350
No. of Characters: 3060 1500
No. of Different Words: 167 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.928 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.186 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.771 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 250 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 184 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 133 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 112 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 31.053 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.971 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.684 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.453 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.651 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.256 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 632, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...changing the Omega University policies. If the author had mentioned the meaning of...
^^
Line 7, column 650, Rule ID: REASON_IS_BECAUSE[1]
Message: Probably an incorrect phrase. Use 'the reason 'is that''.
Suggestion: is that
... example, if the reason for the failure is because of the degraded quality of education in...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, if, second, so, third, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 24.0 13.6137724551 176% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 65.0 55.5748502994 117% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 16.3942115768 146% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3120.0 2260.96107784 138% => OK
No of words: 590.0 441.139720559 134% => OK
Chars per words: 5.28813559322 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.92848004997 4.56307096286 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86409786721 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.296610169492 0.468620217663 63% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 991.8 705.55239521 141% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 2.70958083832 295% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 31.0 22.8473053892 136% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 58.61229958 57.8364921388 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 164.210526316 119.503703932 137% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.0526315789 23.324526521 133% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.21052631579 5.70786347227 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.186701462477 0.218282227539 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0800729887525 0.0743258471296 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0565043287661 0.0701772020484 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.121387995792 0.128457276422 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0250370677993 0.0628817314937 40% => 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: 19.0 14.3799401198 132% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.55 48.3550499002 65% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.6 12.197005988 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.99 12.5979740519 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.64 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 98.500998004 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.4 11.1389221557 129% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.