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 argues that for allowing its graduates to held a better future they must terminate the student evaluation of the professors. The fails to mention several key factors which could help to evaluate it better. To support the argument, author reasons that, if the students evaluation will be banished than the professors would not likely provide students with the more marks. Thus, as an outcome the true results will be reflected. The above argument if filled with the loopholes. So, it cannot provide enough evidence to suggest the mentioned conclusion by the author.
Firstly, it is assumed that the professor are providing higher grades to the students since the procedure of the student evaluation was implemented. There is no information about the grading system before the implementation of the new system of evaluating the teaching effectiveness of professors by their students. It is possible that the professors were leniently checking grading the students even before the introduction of the new assessing system. It is also possible that the students really deserved these grades. Thus, there is no support to the assumption and the data is incompetent to come to such a conclusion.
Secondly, arguments contends that there is a 30% rise in the grades of the students, it lacks the information about what was the base used to measure the grades. Changing the base also changes the grades. Also, there is a chance that students might be deserving such a score. Being, possible that the implementation of the new method might have increased the teaching qualities of the professors. Also, it is not stated clearly whether, the 30% rise in grades is according to their previous grades? Is it according to the total marks of all the students with the base of the number of students? Whether, the increment in the grades are the students of any particular faculty or of the whole university? Thus, there are many flaws about the statistical entry and author must clarify them for proper assessment of the conclusion.
The analogy with the Alpha University also raises many queries about the conclusion, such as, before the implementation of the new evaluation policy were the students of the Omega University successful at getting jobs? Did they get better placement than the Alpha University Students or not? Also, the image of both the universities according to the employers before the implementation of the new policy must be known for the further analysis of the comparison that is done. There is a possibility that the students of Alpha University were not successful in getting jobs, which is not clearly stated and thus, it gives rise to such doubts. So, the author must clarify these queries in order to better deem the argument.
In conclusion the author's argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it further, the author must provide with clear and concrete data, perhaps by the way of detailed analysis of the reasons for the increment of the grades. Finally, to better assess the the above mentioned argument it would be necessary to know more about the information relating the assumption of increasing of the grades, about statistical inference which provides strong evidence and also the analogy which has an credible evidence for the argument of the author to make a strong point.
| 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 |
- Collectors prize the ancient life-size clay statues of human figures made on Kali Island but have long wondered how Kalinese artists were able to depict bodies with such realistic precision. Since archaeologists have recently discovered molds of human hea 50
- Three years ago, because of flooding at the Western Palean Wildlife Preserve, 100 lions and 100 western gazelles were moved to the East Palean Preserve, an area that is home to most of the same species that are found in the western preserve, though in lar 50
- The following appeared as part of an article in a business magazine."A recent study rating 300 male and female Mentian advertising executives according to the average number of hours they sleep per night showed an association between the amount of sleep t 66
- Teachers' salaries should be based on the academic performance of their students.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing an 50
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 210, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'betters', 'wells'?
Suggestion: betters; wells
...factors which could help to evaluate it better. To support the argument, author reason...
^^^^^^
Line 1, column 271, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'students'' or 'student's'?
Suggestion: students'; student's
...e argument, author reasons that, if the students evaluation will be banished than the pr...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 250, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
..., there is a chance that students might be deserving such a score. Being, possible that the ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 681, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...students of any particular faculty or of the whole university? Thus, there are ma...
^^
Line 9, column 19, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...eem the argument. In conclusion the authors argument is unpersuasive as it stands. ...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 257, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...f the grades. Finally, to better assess the the above mentioned argument it would be ne...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 257, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...f the grades. Finally, to better assess the the above mentioned argument it would be ne...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 490, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...evidence and also the analogy which has an credible evidence for the argument of t...
^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'finally', 'first', 'firstly', 'if', 'really', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'thus', 'in conclusion', 'such as', 'by the way']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.239202657807 0.25644967241 93% => OK
Verbs: 0.142857142857 0.15541462614 92% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0730897009967 0.0836205057962 87% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0531561461794 0.0520304965353 102% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0299003322259 0.0272364105082 110% => OK
Prepositions: 0.124584717608 0.125424944231 99% => OK
Participles: 0.046511627907 0.0416121511921 112% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.78315003732 2.79052419416 100% => OK
Infinitives: 0.031561461794 0.026700313972 118% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.159468438538 0.113004496875 141% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0215946843854 0.0255425247493 85% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00996677740864 0.0127820249294 78% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3333.0 2731.13054187 122% => OK
No of words: 548.0 446.07635468 123% => OK
Chars per words: 6.08211678832 6.12365571057 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.83832613839 4.57801047555 106% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.377737226277 0.378187486979 100% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.297445255474 0.287650121315 103% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.213503649635 0.208842608468 102% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.13503649635 0.135150697306 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78315003732 2.79052419416 100% => OK
Unique words: 223.0 207.018472906 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.406934306569 0.469332199767 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 47.3150722694 52.1807786196 91% => OK
How many sentences: 27.0 20.039408867 135% => OK
Sentence length: 20.2962962963 23.2022227129 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.1679216325 57.7814097925 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.444444444 141.986410481 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.2962962963 23.2022227129 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.481481481481 0.724660767414 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 3.58251231527 223% => Correct essay format wanted or double check grammar & spelling issues after essay writing.
Readability: 50.0408218437 51.9672348444 96% => OK
Elegance: 1.81617647059 1.8405768891 99% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.304267584871 0.441005458295 69% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.147528095364 0.135418324435 109% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0964809147132 0.0829849096947 116% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.622066162539 0.58762219726 106% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.171879568358 0.147661913831 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.139061695199 0.193483328276 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0586143456149 0.0970749176394 60% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.689728326776 0.42659136922 162% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0806493914224 0.0774707102158 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.232582849975 0.312017818177 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.045153606157 0.0698173142475 65% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.33743842365 144% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.87684729064 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.82512315271 166% => OK
Positive topic words: 10.0 6.46551724138 155% => OK
Negative topic words: 6.0 5.36822660099 112% => OK
Neutral topic words: 7.0 2.82389162562 248% => OK
Total topic words: 23.0 14.657635468 157% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.