According to a recent report, cheating among college and university students is on the rise. However, Groveton College has successfully reduced student cheating by adopting an honor code, which calls for students to agree not to cheat in their academic endeavors and to notify a faculty member if they suspect that others have cheated. Groveton's honor code replaced a system in which teachers closely monitored students; under that system, teachers reported an average of thirty cases of cheating per year. In the first year the honor code was in place, students reported twenty-one cases of cheating; five years later, this figure had dropped to fourteen. Moreover, in a recent survey, a majority of Groveton students said that they would be likely to cheat with an honor code in place than without. Thus, all colleges and universities should adopt honor codes similar to Groveton's in order to decrease cheating among students.
The author of this memo states that new approach toward cheating among students in is suitable. He state states that honor code works better than monitoring system which teacher control students' actions in the collage. He also argues that number of cheating reported regarding to last years is diminished. The close scrutiny of this argument reveals that all mentioned assumptions are based on some unsubstantiated proposition.
First of all, the arguer assumes that new approach of honor code was replaced by notifying one faculty member and students' agreement on academic endeavors. The author of this member fails to consider that one faculty member is not adequate number for proving a honor code since other faculty member are against the honor code. The author also states that student agree not to cheat in exams and endeavors. It is possible some students agree on honor code, but it never guarantees their endeavors in the future.
Second, the arguer imparts that by establishing honor code in the collage number of cheating reported by the students was decreased from twenty-one cases to fourteen cases, hence this means the honor code works in the collage. Author provides o categorical evidence about the number of students in the collage. it is possible that number of students in the collage within five years were declined in comparison to first year. The author cannot convince me in this case since the number of cheating attributes to number of students in the collage is shorter and this demonstrates that the average number of cheating is escalated. The author also says that local survey stats that majority of students would be less likely to cheat with new honor code rather than past cheating system. Author fails to see that all people participated in the survey are students since it is better to them to agree on new approach to cheat more in the academic endeavors.
Third, the writer states that honor code is suitable in the collage, so it is beneficial to set this system in other colleges and universities. This claim is questionable since it is entirely possible academic system of other university are not preferable to honor code, and in total honor code no longer works in other universities. Without rolling out other factors affecting this claim the author cannot suggest the honor code for other universities.
To sum up, based on unsubstantiated and poor evidence, the author' reasoning cannot convince me. To bolster this argument the author should provide more firm information about number of students in the collage within five years and validity of honor code by local study and survey. I would also need more information about value of current system monitored by faculty in the collage.
--------------------
argument 1 -- not OK.
In the first year the honor code was in place, students reported twenty-one cases of cheating; five years later, this figure had dropped to fourteen. //maybe other reasons have caused the decline not honor code
argument 2 -- not OK.
Moreover, in a recent survey, a majority of Groveton students said that they would be likely to cheat with an honor code in place than without. //need to compare to the percentage if students are closely monitored.
argument 3 -- OK
--------------------
flaws:
You should not question the data from the topic.
In GRE/GMAT, we have to accept all data or evidence are true. It is important to find out loopholes behind surveys or studies. Loopholes mean that we accept all surveys told are true, but there are some conditions applied.
--------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 452 350
No. of Characters: 2248 1500
No. of Different Words: 177 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.611 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.973 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.536 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 168 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 114 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 83 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 36 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.789 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.55 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.526 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.394 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.597 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.199 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5