"We recommend that Grove College preserve its century-old tradition of all-female education rather than admit men into its programs. It is true that a majority of faculty members voted in favor of coeducation, arguing that it would encourage more students to apply to Grove. But 80 percent of the students responding to a survey conducted by the student government wanted the school to remain all female, and over half of the alumnae who answered a separate survey also opposed coeducation. Keeping the college all female will improve morale among students and convince alumnae to keep supporting the college financially."
Grounding on two surveys from the students and the alumnae, supposing that female-only education can improve morale and maintain support from the alumnae, the author accordingly argues that Grove College should preserve the tradition of all-female education. However, to access the efficacy of the argument, several questions want answer.
Citing the survey of the students, the author states that the majority of them agree to maintain the tradition. Nevertheless, is the survey conducted in a scientific way? Do the students enrolled representative of the whole? Do students really understand what they are deciding before expressing their opinion? Besides, why not take the survey of the faculty members seriously as well, since they are also a significant component of the school? While students come and go, some faculty members even devote to the school for their whole life. In order to decide this, reevaluation of both surveys from students and faculty about their comprehensiveness, authenticity and importance is required.
The author values the result of the survey from the alumnae just as they do to the survey of the students. Even if the support from the alumnae is indispensable to the school, it does not follow that the alumnae's preference can decide the future of the school. What if the alumnae's thought has already been out of date? Perhaps coeducation has been found recently that it can benefit the students more by including essential gender equity education. On the other hand, the author’s another claim which keeping all-female will improve morale seems to be a personal speculation. What’s worse, he or she is trying to pass the speculation off as an established fact.
In a nutshell, the argument seems to be convincing at first glance, but is likely to fall apart upon closer scrutiny. To enhance the argument, the author needs to answer the above questions. Otherwise, Grove College may ends up lacking attraction to students and even be forgotten by the new world.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-27 | searchinglife06 | 50 | view |
| 2023-07-26 | searchinglife06 | 55 | view |
| 2022-09-17 | rockchisom | 55 | view |
| 2021-01-21 | lydia05025137 | 50 | view |
| 2020-11-23 | bhimsen | 57 | view |
- Last year the number of students who enrolled in online degree programs offered by nearby Omni University increased by 50 percent During the same year Omni showed a significant decrease from prior years in expenditures for dormitory and classroom space mo 70
- Over the past year our late night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news During this time period most of the complaints received from viewers were concerned with our station s coverage of weather a 71
- There is little justification for society to make extraordinary efforts especially at a great cost in money and jobs to save endangered animal or plant species 54
- The following memorandum is from the business manager of Happy Pancake House restaurants Butter has now been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the southwestern United States Only about 2 percent of customers have complain 83
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers 54
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 7 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 4 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 323 350
No. of Characters: 1638 1500
No. of Different Words: 178 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.239 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.071 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.755 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 132 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 94 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 65 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 40 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.944 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.843 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.611 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.322 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.502 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.106 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 151, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a scientific way" with adverb for "scientific"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
.... Nevertheless, is the survey conducted in a scientific way? Do the students enrolled representativ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 643, Rule ID: ESTABLISHED_FACT[1]
Message: Use simply 'a fact'.
Suggestion: a fact
...s trying to pass the speculation off as an established fact. In a nutshell, the argument seems t...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, besides, but, first, however, if, may, nevertheless, really, so, then, well, while, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.6327345309 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 28.8173652695 59% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 55.5748502994 81% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1690.0 2260.96107784 75% => OK
No of words: 323.0 441.139720559 73% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.23219814241 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23936324884 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85212422936 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 204.123752495 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.569659442724 0.468620217663 122% => OK
syllable_count: 522.0 705.55239521 74% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 46.6279270421 57.8364921388 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.8888888889 119.503703932 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.9444444444 23.324526521 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.66666666667 5.70786347227 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.135813175577 0.218282227539 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0360990146943 0.0743258471296 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0448801411302 0.0701772020484 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0840761892425 0.128457276422 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0459177614431 0.0628817314937 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 14.3799401198 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.3550499002 112% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.76 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.59 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 98.500998004 85% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 12.3882235529 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.