The following appeared in a letter from the faculty committee to the president of Seatown University:A study conducted at nearby Oceania University showed that faculty retention is higher when professors are offered free tuition at the university for thei

The above statement makes the argument that in order to raise morale among the current and potential faculty members, free-tuition policy for their children is needed. As it stands, the rigor of the given statement is weak because it fails to provide valid pieces of evidence that can help elucidate or strengthen the presented argument.

First of all, it should be clarified that the high level of faculty retention with the free-tuition policy was meaningful enough to initiate the new policy. In the argument, the exact level of retention ratio with and without the policy is not suggested. If the difference was so small that the investment of free-tuition policy was not meaningful, the fund used to conduct the policy could be used to an alternative way to raise the morale of faculty members such as directly raising their salaries.

Moreover, the arguer should present an evidence showing that the rise in the faculty retention was actually due to the free-tuition policy. There are other possible explanations for the rise in the faculty retention ratio like an economic recession. When the economic growth is sluggish, the job prospects for the professors are worsened and they are more inclined to stick to their present jobs instead of taking risks to get another job. What could have happened is the inception of free tuition policy coincided with the economic downturn and the researchers confused the higher faculty retention ratio as the effect of the new policy. It is hard to evaluate whether the external conditions was the same with the given argument.

The arguer also has to provide the evidence that the free-tuition policy would practically work out for the faculty members of Seatown University. Assuming that the free-tuition policy is effective, the arguer should suggest the family construction of the faculty members of the Seatown University. If the Seatown University mainly hired young professors without kids, the suggested policy would turn out to be a failure because the policy does not have any incentive for the existing professors. Thus, the arguer should prove that the ratio of professors with kids in Seatown University is not significantly different from that in the study of Oceania University. Without that proof, the plausibility of the argument is severely harmed.

It is an important task for a university to attract professors with competitiveness to maintain its research capabilities. Providing free university education for their faculty members could be one way to achieve that goal. Lacking the pieces of evidence to successfully prove the effectiveness of the policy, however, the arguer needs to suggest additional information to gain strength in his claim.