The presented recommendation made by the president and administrative staff of Grove College to the college's governing committed aims to recommend that the college conserve its century-old tradition of all-female education rather than admit men into its programs. The argument is based on evidence pertaining to the survey of faculty members, students, and the alumnae and the anticipated result of the coeducation. It might be logical at first glance, however, the author of the recommendation should answer several questions related to its grounds.
To begin with, the author mentions that the majority of faculty members voted in favor of coeducation, arguing it would encourage more students to apply to Grove. It seems like that the author also agree with the reasoning that coeducation can bring more students, nonetheless, it seems questionable that if the college permit men to admit, the more students are warranted. If it can not result in bringing more students into the college, the author can successfully counter the survey and the result of the survey cannot be used as a ground of opposing the all-female policy. Thus, the author should answer the question: Is there a causal relation between coeducation and more admission?
Secondly, the author presents the result of other surveys: the students and the alumnae to undergird to the argument. Although the author thinks the representativeness and validity of the surveys are guaranteed, however, the author should provide more information related to cited surveys. Even if 80 percent of the students and over half of the alumnae disagree with the coeducation policy, it is unwarranted without the information related to the total number of respondents, what questionnaires are, and how it is conducted. If there is a sample bias and unbalanced questionnaires, the author might not use the results of the surveys.
Lastly, the author argues that preserving the all-female policy will improve morale among students and convince alumnae to keep supporting the college financially. However, there is no appropriate evidence to prove the causal relationship between morale among students and the all-female education. Without any valid surveys or researches, the author cannot ignore the possibility of the opposite of the argument: coeducation will improve students' morale. In addition, it is not sure how much the alumnae support the finance of the college. Even if the alumnae support the college because of the policy, even it might not be true, the author should prove the amount and percentage of the alumnae's support. If the amount expected to be earned by coeducation outweighs the amount of alumnae's support, it might be better to forsake the tradition.
In sum, the author wants to assert the preservation of all-female education is good for the college and students, it is not enough to evaluate the author's argument. In order to fully evaluate the author's claim, the author should give answers pertaining to the accurate information of cited surveys, and the causal relationship between the coeducation and expected results.
- One month ago all the showerheads in the first three buildings of the Sunnyside Towers complex were modified to restrict maximum water flow to one third of what it used to be Although actual readings of water usage before and after the adjustment are no 58
- Archaeologists have long thought that an artifact called the pemchint was used by Dodecan people solely as a musical instrument Pemchints consist of hollowed pieces of bone shell or wood that are tied together with long straps When whirled in the air the 91
- 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 53
- People who make decisions based on emotions and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers 54
- In order to improve the quality of instruction at the college and university level all faculty should be required to spend time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach 66
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: 19 15
No. of Words: 490 350
No. of Characters: 2559 1500
No. of Different Words: 198 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.705 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.222 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.887 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 215 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 158 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 104 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 64 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.789 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.895 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.737 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.4 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.59 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.135 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 149, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...dents, it is not enough to evaluate the authors argument. In order to fully evaluate th...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, lastly, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, thus, in addition, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 11.1786427146 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 67.0 55.5748502994 121% => OK
Nominalization: 29.0 16.3942115768 177% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2613.0 2260.96107784 116% => OK
No of words: 490.0 441.139720559 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.33265306122 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70488508055 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97265407 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 204.123752495 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.432653061224 0.468620217663 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 828.0 705.55239521 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 15.0 8.76447105788 171% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.552623807 57.8364921388 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.526315789 119.503703932 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.7894736842 23.324526521 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.31578947368 5.70786347227 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.198175119755 0.218282227539 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0668348169029 0.0743258471296 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.116530930229 0.0701772020484 166% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.13551506675 0.128457276422 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.12042756404 0.0628817314937 192% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 14.3799401198 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.3550499002 78% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.93 12.5979740519 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.9 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 125.0 98.500998004 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 12.3882235529 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.