Fifteen years ago, Omega University implemented a new procedure that encouraged students to evaluate the teaching effectiveness of all their professors. Since that time, Omega professors have begun to assign higher grades in their classes, and overall student grade averages at Omega have risen by 30 percent. Potential employers, looking at this dramatic rise in grades, believe that grades at Omega are inflated and do not accurately reflect student achievement; as a result, Omega graduates have not been as successful at getting jobs as have graduates from nearby Alpha University. To enable its graduates to secure better jobs, Omega University should terminate student evaluation of professors.
The argument reflects the author's suggestion that Omega University should terminate the faculty evaluation process as it has a lot of negative points associated with it. Author finds this evaluation process as a sole reason for students not getting jobs. But this argument does not produce a cogent case for sudden termination of evaluation procedure. It is easy to comprehend the need of termination but this argument is rife with holes and assumptions, and thus, not strong enough to support the termination of evaluation process.
Citing the statistics of rising grades of students, author posits that the students' grades have risen by 30 percent since the introduction of evaluation process. Author here fails to analyze other factors also. As the time is changing and competition in professional world is increasing rapidly, it is obvious that cognitive abilities of students are also increasing. Due to increased competition, students are working hard to secure jobs and lead a descent settled life. Author ignores this side of reasoning and blindly assumes that the evaluation of professors has led to higher grades. Until this argument is backed up by strong evidences, it will remains questionable.
Additionally, author reports that the employers are denying employment after looking at the inflated rate of achievements. What author here fails to understand is that the employers are third party and know very less about the internal functioning of university. They are not very well aware about the capabilities of students enrolled and the professors involved in evaluation. Instead of looking on the rising achievement rates, employers should focus on the capabilities that a student possess. They should have their own aptitude and technical exams to judge whether a student has potential to secure a job or not.
Finally, the argument does not cover the job requirements and pre-requisites. It might be possible that the employers are looking for different stream of studies, like management or finance, which is not a part of study in Omega University. Courses offered in Alpha University might be different from the courses offered in Omega university. There is also a possibility that students at Alpha university has desired professional skills unlike students at Omega university having only sound theoretical knowledge. Author fails to consider these important factors and draws a faulty conclusion.
Argument should be supported by other evidences also. Author should consider the employer's requirement before taking any decision. Evaluation of professors is a good technique to ensure proper teaching in university. Courses offered and skills required for securing a job should be considered before terminating the process of evaluation of professors.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 27, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
The argument reflects the authors suggestion that Omega University should...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 206, Rule ID: ALSO_SENT_END[1]
Message: 'Also' is not used at the end of the sentence. Use 'as well' instead.
Suggestion: as well
...hor here fails to analyze other factors also. As the time is changing and competitio...
^^^^
Line 3, column 653, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'remain'
Suggestion: remain
... backed up by strong evidences, it will remains questionable. Additionally, author r...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 49, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...ally, author reports that the employers are denying employment after looking at the inflate...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 49, Rule ID: ALSO_SENT_END[1]
Message: 'Also' is not used at the end of the sentence. Use 'as well' instead.
Suggestion: as well
... should be supported by other evidences also. Author should consider the employers r...
^^^^
Line 9, column 82, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'employers'' or 'employer's'?
Suggestion: employers'; employer's
...dences also. Author should consider the employers requirement before taking any decision....
^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'finally', 'if', 'look', 'so', 'third', 'thus', 'well']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.283870967742 0.25644967241 111% => OK
Verbs: 0.184946236559 0.15541462614 119% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0688172043011 0.0836205057962 82% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0559139784946 0.0520304965353 107% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0193548387097 0.0272364105082 71% => OK
Prepositions: 0.133333333333 0.125424944231 106% => OK
Participles: 0.0623655913978 0.0416121511921 150% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.0016544924 2.79052419416 108% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0236559139785 0.026700313972 89% => OK
Particles: 0.00215053763441 0.001811407834 119% => OK
Determiners: 0.0924731182796 0.113004496875 82% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0193548387097 0.0255425247493 76% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00430107526882 0.0127820249294 34% => Some subClauses wanted starting by 'Which, Who, What, Whom, Whose.....'
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2785.0 2731.13054187 102% => OK
No of words: 430.0 446.07635468 96% => OK
Chars per words: 6.47674418605 6.12365571057 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55372829156 4.57801047555 99% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.444186046512 0.378187486979 117% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.344186046512 0.287650121315 120% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.258139534884 0.208842608468 124% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.179069767442 0.135150697306 132% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0016544924 2.79052419416 108% => OK
Unique words: 216.0 207.018472906 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.502325581395 0.469332199767 107% => OK
Word variations: 56.3822457639 52.1807786196 108% => OK
How many sentences: 24.0 20.039408867 120% => OK
Sentence length: 17.9166666667 23.2022227129 77% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.3741406442 57.7814097925 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.041666667 141.986410481 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.9166666667 23.2022227129 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.375 0.724660767414 52% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 3.58251231527 167% => OK
Readability: 52.3352713178 51.9672348444 101% => OK
Elegance: 1.84297520661 1.8405768891 100% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.32419165347 0.441005458295 74% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.111312676647 0.135418324435 82% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0863545784817 0.0829849096947 104% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.474264276383 0.58762219726 81% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.14081711614 0.147661913831 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.108482923934 0.193483328276 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0642864872954 0.0970749176394 66% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.361670107946 0.42659136922 85% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0595482592652 0.0774707102158 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.207072952082 0.312017818177 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0483683379911 0.0698173142475 69% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.33743842365 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.87684729064 174% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.82512315271 104% => OK
Positive topic words: 5.0 6.46551724138 77% => OK
Negative topic words: 9.0 5.36822660099 168% => OK
Neutral topic words: 4.0 2.82389162562 142% => OK
Total topic words: 18.0 14.657635468 123% => 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: This is not the final score. 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.