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 their own college-aged children. Therefore, Seatown should institute a free-tuition policy for its professors for the purpose of enhancing morale among the faculty and luring new 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 allowing free tuitions for the professors' children would enhance the morality and lure new professors that will result in a higher faculty retention. Though initially, it might seem a good decision, I think the whole argument is spurious - further clarifications and reasoning are needed to say something like that. I would try to find out some in the following section of my writing.
Firstly, the argument says in Oceania University, faculty retention is higher due to their claim. I think this is absolutely not clear whether other criteria galvanize that survey conducted in that particular university or not. There might have other parameters that kept their significance in that survey. The faculty committee's letter does not clarify this nuance, rather they without considering this important ground recommend the same for Seatown University.
Secondly, there is no clear indication that the faculty members of the Seatown University are currently immoral or the university is unable to lure new professors. For the sake of the argument, we might think that possibility as the faculty committee suggested the president, yet, to state something about the whole university should have strong ground before pointing everyone out. I do not think each and every professor is immoral - it is their sacred duty to teach the student and I do not think every one of them will think differently. There is absolutely at no point, each of them will think - I will teach better or give maximum effort only when my children are the one I am teaching. This does not make a sense, at least, not for a clear headed person.
Thirdly, say for the sake of the argument that professors will teach better if the university free tuition at the same university. But does that claim plausible? Does every professor has a child? Say, if they have, are they are enough aged to join the college? I do not think this is possible in the normal case, nor the argument draws a clear statement regarding this.
Lastly, offering free tuition to their own children may galvanize the professors' teaching, indeed, have raise several questions. In my mind at this point, I am thinking - does this mean that professors pay roll is not enough? I mean in normal case they earn good money, still they will have to offer free tuition for their children! This does not add up. At some point if this is the galvanizing factor the argument should have indicate why the faculty committee is talking about free tuition.
In conclusion, I do not think the argument is fair enough to blatantly suggest the university's president as they did. Several flaws and questions should have overcomed and answered as I have pointed out in my writing.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-08 | Keerthi98 | 33 | view |
| 2019-12-02 | Opak Pulu | 58 | view |
| 2019-10-31 | solankis304 | 63 | view |
| 2019-10-16 | Deepali24 | 69 | view |
| 2019-10-14 | Siddhivinayak Shanbhagd | 49 | view |
- All too often, companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently. If companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees, such consultants would be unnecessary.Write a response in which you discu 50
- 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 66
- An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be p 79
- Claim: Even though young people often receive the advice to “follow your dreams,” more emphasis should be placed on picking worthy goals.Reason: Many people’s dreams are inherently selfish.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which 52
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the pos 62
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 267, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...I think the whole argument is spurious - further clarifications and reasoning are...
^^
Line 7, column 184, Rule ID: DOES_NP_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'have'?
Suggestion: have
...t claim plausible? Does every professor has a child? Say, if they have, are they ar...
^^^
Line 9, column 105, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'raised'.
Suggestion: raised
...e the professors teaching, indeed, have raise several questions. In my mind at this p...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 429, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'indicated'.
Suggestion: indicated
...anizing factor the argument should have indicate why the faculty committee is talking ab...
^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'first', 'firstly', 'if', 'lastly', 'may', 'regarding', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'still', 'third', 'thirdly', 'at least', 'i mean', 'i think', 'in conclusion', 'talking about']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.200787401575 0.25644967241 78% => OK
Verbs: 0.188976377953 0.15541462614 122% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0866141732283 0.0836205057962 104% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0590551181102 0.0520304965353 114% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0629921259843 0.0272364105082 231% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.0905511811024 0.125424944231 72% => OK
Participles: 0.0354330708661 0.0416121511921 85% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.65642535017 2.79052419416 95% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0196850393701 0.026700313972 74% => OK
Particles: 0.00590551181102 0.001811407834 326% => OK
Determiners: 0.11811023622 0.113004496875 105% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0295275590551 0.0255425247493 116% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00787401574803 0.0127820249294 62% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2738.0 2731.13054187 100% => OK
No of words: 462.0 446.07635468 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.92640692641 6.12365571057 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.63618218583 4.57801047555 101% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.339826839827 0.378187486979 90% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.268398268398 0.287650121315 93% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.194805194805 0.208842608468 93% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.132034632035 0.135150697306 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65642535017 2.79052419416 95% => OK
Unique words: 213.0 207.018472906 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.461038961039 0.469332199767 98% => OK
Word variations: 51.6270536336 52.1807786196 99% => OK
How many sentences: 24.0 20.039408867 120% => OK
Sentence length: 19.25 23.2022227129 83% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.8158209498 57.7814097925 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.083333333 141.986410481 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.25 23.2022227129 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.75 0.724660767414 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.14285714286 117% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 3.58251231527 112% => OK
Readability: 46.0898268398 51.9672348444 89% => OK
Elegance: 1.05063291139 1.8405768891 57% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.520931650483 0.441005458295 118% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.0933495740326 0.135418324435 69% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0824618385913 0.0829849096947 99% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.491840258919 0.58762219726 84% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.14273741458 0.147661913831 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.177420251985 0.193483328276 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.141375132032 0.0970749176394 146% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.370504548303 0.42659136922 87% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0970292220947 0.0774707102158 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.324500278261 0.312017818177 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0914330197077 0.0698173142475 131% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.33743842365 156% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.87684729064 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.82512315271 104% => OK
Positive topic words: 11.0 6.46551724138 170% => OK
Negative topic words: 5.0 5.36822660099 93% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 2.82389162562 106% => OK
Total topic words: 19.0 14.657635468 130% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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: 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.