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

The originator of the argument asserts that policy which was implemented at Omega University causes the student's problems with getting and securing jobs. Thus, the policy should be terminated. The idea is buttressed by several evidences which should be evaluated.

First of all, we are told that students who finished Alpha University are more likely to be hired than the alumnae from Omega University. Despite the author's belief that the cause of the students' problem is the fulfilled policy, some other factors may lead to the difficulties. Perhaps two universities are not equal to each other, for instance, they may prepare for a different professions Alpha University may teach future software engineers, this profession today in a great demand therefore, the Alpha's alumnae may easily find job. On the contrary, Omega University may prepare future physicists or archeologists, these professions may be less required by business. Moreover, perhaps Alpha University hire better educators, if the university possesses a bunch of eminent scientists and researchers, its students will be more attractive for potential employers. In other words, the comparison of two universities is not reasonable due to the possibility that they are not equal in many ways.

Moreover, the author connects the implementation of the policy with the decline in the employers interest to Omega's alumnae. However, the probability exists that we have a deal with correlation/causation mistake. Perhaps the policy was fulfilled in response on employers discord with the low quality of student's preparation. Consequently, the policy does not lead to the problem but instead was an attempt to improve the situation and tackle the discrod.

What is more, the author of the text asserts that employers conduct is explainted by their mistrust to the level of students' preparation. However, this assertion has no supportive evidences. As we said above, perhaps the students' profession are not popular among the employers, or the level of education is not strong enough to satisfy the requirements of the employers. In other words, the belief is not reasonable.

Finally, the argument claims that termination of the policy will automatically lead to solving the students' problems with getting jobs. However, the cancellation of the policy does not improve quality of education, the specializations which are taught at the university. Thus, a mere stopping of the practicing of the policy is not guarantee that the Omega's alumnae will be more attractive for future employers. What is more, the policy may serve well and in this case, the graduates' problems may be worsen.

In conclusion, the author of the policy maintains that to secure jobs of university's alumnae the policy whihc allows students to gauge teachers' performance should be terminated; however, the cause effect connection between the policy and students' hardship is not proven and thus it is questionable. The evidences used by the author to support his or her conclusion have several explanations and should not be used to support the conclusion.