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.
Seatown should institute a free-tuition policy for its professor for the purpose of enhancing morale among the faculty and luring new professors. Well, the above conclusion is based on various logical fallacies and assumed facts that needs to be supported by facts in order to make it a valid conclusion.
Formerly, it based on a piece from the letter drafted by the faculty committee to the president of the Seatown university. It is entirely assumed that the faculty committee is an active body of the University and the opinion that is asserted is the opinion of most of the faculty members of the college. Possibly, it is just the opinion of few teachers who have college- aged children, failing to consider that some faculty may not have kids or those who have kids not falling in such a category. If such a policy is passed it would be in a way unfair to the remaining faculty members who put in the same efforts but are not give equal benefits.
Next, the letter is based on a survey conducted at a nearby Oceania University which shows that the faculty retention was higher when professors are offered free tuition at the university. Probably, the faculty who joined the university only with the purpose that their kids future would be assured and hence are more likely to stick to the university which could be the valid reason for a higher retention. It is also possible that the demographics of the faculty members in Seatown university is quite different and the same model that works in another university won't work in Seatown.
As everyone is rightly aware, education is not a cheap affair. With a meager salary of a college professor, a parent may at times not be able to afford college tuition fees of their kids and would regret when their kids are unable to fulfil their dreams only because of financial constraint. Therefore, the argument can be strengthened by modifying the free-tuition policy in such a manner that it stands valid only if the student has proved his/her worth in terms of academics or the field in which one chooses to major in. By doing so it would be unbiased on the part of other students who wish to seek that coveted seat in the college.
On the contrary, the argument can be weakened if majority of the professors who did not have a hand in drafting the letter are of a view that their college-aged children are matured enough to make an informed decision about their careers and which college they would prefer to educate themselves. The professors, as parents stand by the opinion that free-tuition policy would act as crutches to their kids and would prevent them from achieving their dreams and creating a hindrance in making their own decisions. They also fear that their kids would stay in the same protected environment for years together and not be free to take risky decisions in life. The professors also fear that the free-tuition and assured admission to a pristine college would make their kids incompetent in nature as they would lose the thrill to take competitive exams and compete as their friends would do.
In the end, more evidence is needed to reach a cogent conclusion.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-08-13 | ribhunirek | 54 | view |
- Some people believe that increasing violence in the media is the cause of increasing violence in our society, especially among children. Others believe that children's peer groups and parental role models are a much more influence on children's behavior. 79
- The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company. "According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than in an 54
- Claim: The emergence of the online "blogosphere" has significantly weakened the quality of political discourse in the United States.Reason: When anyone can publish political opinions easily, standards for covering news and political topics will inevitably 62
- 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 54
- Mass media and the internet have caused people’s attention spans to get shorter. However, the overall effect has been positive: while people are less able to focus on one thing, they more than make up for it with an enhanced ability to sort through lar 83
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 417, Rule ID: SOME_FACULTY[1]
Message: Use 'faculty members'.
Suggestion: faculty members
...children, failing to consider that some faculty may not have kids or those who have kid...
^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'hence', 'if', 'may', 'so', 'then', 'therefore', 'well', 'on the contrary']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.244791666667 0.25644967241 95% => OK
Verbs: 0.166666666667 0.15541462614 107% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0815972222222 0.0836205057962 98% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0434027777778 0.0520304965353 83% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0451388888889 0.0272364105082 166% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.130208333333 0.125424944231 104% => OK
Participles: 0.0503472222222 0.0416121511921 121% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.60476200779 2.79052419416 93% => OK
Infinitives: 0.03125 0.026700313972 117% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.121527777778 0.113004496875 108% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0295138888889 0.0255425247493 116% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0260416666667 0.0127820249294 204% => Maybe 'Which' is overused. If other WH_determiners like 'Who, What, Whom, Whose...' are used too in sentences, then there are no issues.
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3148.0 2731.13054187 115% => OK
No of words: 546.0 446.07635468 122% => OK
Chars per words: 5.76556776557 6.12365571057 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.83390555256 4.57801047555 106% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.32967032967 0.378187486979 87% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.254578754579 0.287650121315 89% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.155677655678 0.208842608468 75% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.10989010989 0.135150697306 81% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60476200779 2.79052419416 93% => OK
Unique words: 246.0 207.018472906 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.450549450549 0.469332199767 96% => OK
Word variations: 52.9114534518 52.1807786196 101% => OK
How many sentences: 18.0 20.039408867 90% => OK
Sentence length: 30.3333333333 23.2022227129 131% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.666166875 57.7814097925 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 174.888888889 141.986410481 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.3333333333 23.2022227129 131% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.555555555556 0.724660767414 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.14285714286 117% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 3.58251231527 28% => OK
Readability: 55.7912087912 51.9672348444 107% => OK
Elegance: 1.66666666667 1.8405768891 91% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.563879365625 0.441005458295 128% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.168526444332 0.135418324435 124% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0947964443288 0.0829849096947 114% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.656856061903 0.58762219726 112% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.156051138822 0.147661913831 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.258991818522 0.193483328276 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.156790273657 0.0970749176394 162% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.415544421686 0.42659136922 97% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.148894571466 0.0774707102158 192% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.356038435716 0.312017818177 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.173269832157 0.0698173142475 248% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.33743842365 96% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.87684729064 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.82512315271 83% => OK
Positive topic words: 6.0 6.46551724138 93% => OK
Negative topic words: 6.0 5.36822660099 112% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 2.82389162562 106% => OK
Total topic words: 15.0 14.657635468 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.