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.
The argument avers that after offering free tuition of their college-aged children, Oceania University observes retention to be higher in faculty; for this reason, Seatown university should also follow the policy of Oceania University to enhance morale and attract more professors. The argument needs more evidences to prove its strength, there are several evidences missing which makes the argument flawed.
Firstly, the argument suggests that Seatown University should follow the same policy as Oceania University; only then the professors would be attracted to Oceania University and morale among professors would increase, but there is no evidences or study conducted which says that both university is compatible to each other. What worked for Oceania University will work for Seatown university as well, assuming this is not a proper argument. Seatown university may have a lot of students whose parents are professors of the same university, in that case the university will face financial problem. Perhaps, Oceania University is a very small one compared to Seatown university, so this worked in case of Oceania University. There are no other information about these two universities.
Secondly, is there any other way to allure professors in Seatown university? Do Seatown University need more professors? Perhaps Seatown university has already enough expert professors, perhaps they do not need any more professor. Professors' salaries can be increased to attract new professor, they can be provided with more facilities as well. If any of these policies work in case of Seatown University, the argument is undermined.
Thirdly, the argument does not say anywhere that before conducting the study at Oceania University, the faculty retention was lower. It is not clear that only after offering up free tuition to the children, retention went high. Is it the only reason that retention is higher now? Perhaps, the professors children are now admitted to Oceania University made the faculty retention higher, perhaps the professors are now more attentive to their works for some other reasons, perhaps they are now following some other way of teaching. There is little evidences shown about the study and more elaborated description of the study is needed to evaluate this argument.
The argument, as it stands now is flawed. It lacks specific evidences, if any of the discussed reasons of the changes in Oceania University is true, it undermines the argument.
Comments
Essay evaluation 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: 386 350
No. of Characters: 2035 1500
No. of Different Words: 165 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.432 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.272 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.701 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 160 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 135 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 92 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 61 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.316 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.126 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.526 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.384 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.588 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.16 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 223, Rule ID: THERE_S_MANY[4]
Message: Did you mean 'there are no evidences'?
Suggestion: there are no evidences
...le among professors would increase, but there is no evidences or study conducted which says that both...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 532, Rule ID: THERE_S_MANY[4]
Message: Did you mean 'There are little evidences'?
Suggestion: There are little evidences
...w following some other way of teaching. There is little evidences shown about the study and more elaborat...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, well
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 55.5748502994 68% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2102.0 2260.96107784 93% => OK
No of words: 386.0 441.139720559 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.44559585492 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.43248042346 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81707133321 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.455958549223 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 693.0 705.55239521 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59920159681 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 75.6188869693 57.8364921388 131% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.631578947 119.503703932 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3157894737 23.324526521 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.42105263158 5.70786347227 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.366158220224 0.218282227539 168% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.121381170642 0.0743258471296 163% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0835103316707 0.0701772020484 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.203091503737 0.128457276422 158% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0867526967362 0.0628817314937 138% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 14.3799401198 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.26 48.3550499002 71% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.5 12.197005988 111% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.33 12.5979740519 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.02 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 98.500998004 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 20.0 12.3882235529 161% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.