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.
A good argument is recognized by the presence of compelling reasons. Unfortunately, the letter from the faculty is directly antithetical to this notion. The faculty committee has made two fatal assumptions for which more evidence is needed to evaluate their arguments on their merit.
Firstly, we would need to discover if the professors made their decisions as a result of the free tuition policy. This is because correlation doesn't necessarily imply causation. It may be that the cause of higher faculty retention at Oceania was a combination of various policies. The professors at Seatown may also be of a middle aged group who are unwilling to change their jobs after and also too early for retirement. Professors in this category would definitely produce a higher retention rate. Hence, to evaluate this argument, the committee will need to carry out procedures to ascertain the cause of the higher retention rate.
Secondly, do the professors at Seatown university share the same motivations with those at Oceania? It may be that the motivators of professors at Seatown are different from those of Oceania's professors. It may also be that the fees at Oceania are extremely high and the free tuition policy came to great effect. If Seatown has a cheaper fees then the policy is unlikely to work. Thus, to strengthen this argument, the faculty committee will need to provide evidence on what motivates the professors at both universities. If this evidence is provided, it will become possible to evaluate if the professors at both universities are motivated by the same things.
In conclusion, the argument above is weak, mendacious and is based on spurious assumptions. Hence, the faculty committee will need to gather the pieces of evidence stated in this article. It is only in the light of this newly compiled data that we will be able to evaluate the strength of this argument
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-19 | DCAD123 | 65 | view |
| 2022-11-08 | ZAINBM | 33 | view |
| 2022-09-28 | Mufaddal Rangwala | 66 | view |
| 2021-12-31 | landerson1 | 58 | view |
| 2021-08-03 | magaashok | 59 | view |
- The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station Over the past year our late night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news During this time period most of the complain 50
- 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 paid 59
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with this recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position 66
- Many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered to all people in areas where the disease is detected However since there is a small possibility that a person will die as a result of the inoculations we cannot permit i 45
- A movie producer sent the following memo to the head of the movie studio We need to increase the funding for the movie Working Title by 10 in order to ensure a quality product As you know we are working with a first time director whose only previous exper 68
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 3 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 2 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 313 350
No. of Characters: 1544 1500
No. of Different Words: 152 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.206 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.933 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.798 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 110 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 92 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 70 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 45 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.389 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 4.855 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.317 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.51 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.095 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 143, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ion policy. This is because correlation doesnt necessarily imply causation. It may be ...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 314, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ee tuition policy came to great effect. If Seatown has a cheaper fees then the pol...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, hence, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, thus, in conclusion, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 11.1786427146 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 55.5748502994 86% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1583.0 2260.96107784 70% => OK
No of words: 312.0 441.139720559 71% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.07371794872 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20279927342 4.56307096286 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87596816446 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 150.0 204.123752495 73% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.480769230769 0.468620217663 103% => OK
syllable_count: 516.6 705.55239521 73% => 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: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 25.2347619342 57.8364921388 44% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 87.9444444444 119.503703932 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.3333333333 23.324526521 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.44444444444 5.70786347227 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.295483531946 0.218282227539 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0965301489199 0.0743258471296 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0748934028023 0.0701772020484 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.165078756789 0.128457276422 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0967091211321 0.0628817314937 154% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 14.3799401198 77% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.83 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.17 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 98.500998004 74% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 12.3882235529 57% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.