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 argument suggests that terminating a pupil assessment of professors because the average score has been arisen by 30 percent since the teacher evaluation procedure started in omega university and the alumni have not been good in career after graduation compared to the nearby alpha university. some musing over evidence is first very much in order before taking any steps.
The writer claims that the grade has risen by 30 percent since the evaluation procedure started and the potential workers believe that would be an inflation that implying the sudden grade improvement results from the teacher who wants students to leave high evaluation results toward the course he taught. however, the credentials of the connection is unclear and more evidence is required to present before we trust the potential workers. it would be correct if the observation is done with authoritative, 3rd party, disinterested institution with fully representative samples and validation. still, it could be a different story. For example, the assessors who have inclination on the objection against the teacher evaluation procedure just took some deviated or special cases, not fully representative, to claim the counterproductive of the assessment system. therefore, the author has to provide the counterpart evidence of the potential workers to strengthen the argument.
Additionally, the alumni who haven’t been as successful at getting jobs as nearby alpha university could be a reason that the system is not effective as expected. however, the counterpart evidence is not described before jumping into a conclusion, the background of two schools and previous employment rate of alumni. because we don’t know about the details of two schools, it is unclear and insufficient evidence to say the policy would fail. For example, probably the alpha university has been an industrial school famous of its technical courses that big companies would like to hire the alumni who could have ability to do the job without training. In contrast, students in omega university are more likely to favor the literal jobs that is scarce today, and the unemployment rate has been lower than the other long time. therefore, we could not say the cause of failure is the teacher assessing policy, the author has to provide evidence mentioned above to make it more persuasive.
Even if two schools have the same environment, condition and background, some evidence is still lacking, the comparison between year to year of before and after the policy. For example, the employment rate of alumni of omega university was 80% before the assessment and 85% after it while that of omega university has always been around 90%. In this case, conceivably, the policy would be beneficial instead of failure. The writer needs to provide the credential of evidence to make the argument more convincing.
In conclusion, the author has to address the evidence mentioned above to make the argument more cogent.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 12 15
No. of Words: 475 350
No. of Characters: 2437 1500
No. of Different Words: 218 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.668 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.131 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.819 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 183 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 143 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 95 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 70 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 39.583 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 22.831 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.833 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.392 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.59 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.14 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 298, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Some
...ompared to the nearby alpha university. some musing over evidence is first very much...
^^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...much in order before taking any steps. The writer claims that the grade has ris...
^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 314, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: However
...on results toward the course he taught. however, the credentials of the connection is u...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 448, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: It
... before we trust the potential workers. it would be correct if the observation is ...
^^
Line 2, column 602, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Still
... representative samples and validation. still, it could be a different story. For exa...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 871, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Therefore
...terproductive of the assessment system. therefore, the author has to provide the counterp...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...al workers to strengthen the argument. Additionally, the alumni who haven’t bee...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 171, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: However
...he system is not effective as expected. however, the counterpart evidence is not descri...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 326, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Because
...and previous employment rate of alumni. because we don’t know about the details of two ...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 834, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Therefore
...as been lower than the other long time. therefore, we could not say the cause of failure ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...oned above to make it more persuasive. Even if two schools have the same enviro...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, so, still, then, therefore, while, as to, for example, in conclusion, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 28.8173652695 66% => OK
Preposition: 67.0 55.5748502994 121% => OK
Nominalization: 34.0 16.3942115768 207% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2499.0 2260.96107784 111% => OK
No of words: 473.0 441.139720559 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.28329809725 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.66353547975 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9012983171 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 227.0 204.123752495 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.479915433404 0.468620217663 102% => OK
syllable_count: 805.5 705.55239521 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.76447105788 160% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 67.7580018478 57.8364921388 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.526315789 119.503703932 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.8947368421 23.324526521 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.31578947368 5.70786347227 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 11.0 5.25449101796 209% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.139635779739 0.218282227539 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0369925292605 0.0743258471296 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0515029057412 0.0701772020484 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0768551669059 0.128457276422 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0426872545204 0.0628817314937 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 14.3799401198 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.3550499002 80% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.64 12.5979740519 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.37 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 98.500998004 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 12.3882235529 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.