2.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.
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 notion that the student evaluation prevents students from getting well jobs may seem cogent at first glance. Because that evaluation inflated student's score and made the score less valid for employers. At the same time, students from Alpha University seem more successful at getting jobs. However, the argument is filled up with assumptions and logical mistakes. More evidence is demanded to make it more persuasive. Three reasons would suffice to support that idea.
To begin with, the arguer fails to prove the evaluation makes grade inflated. There is equally possible that professors found their garde system needs to be reformed for the rather more difficult lessons they teach. It is unfair to make the student who learning more erudite knowledge recieve low grade. At the same time, it is hard to deny the possibility that professors found a new method to teach efficiently and achieved a remarkable development embodied by students' grade. Hence, more evidence is needed to prove the link between evaluation and grade inflated.
Moreover, the arguer incorrectly assumes that potential employers are interested in students' grade. These employers may focus on the working skills which Omega University students ignored. The possibility that most employers recieved fund from other universities tends to employ their students is also considerable. Therefore, it is essential to prove that employers truely consider the garde of students is significant.
Finally, even if the assumptions above are true, the argument still fails to provide the evidence of rather poor case of getting jobs than Alpha University. It is fair to question the validity of that conclusion. There is no evidence showing that the conclusion comes from a comprehensive survey. They may just calculate the total number of students getting work. This would be incorrect without concerning the total students or students who chose a graduate school. The vague opinion could weakly support the argument. More persuasive evidence is demanded to robust it.
To sum up, the argument is less cogent than it seems. Opinion of cancelling evaluation should be reconsidered carefully. Providing more evidence is important to rule out other explanations.
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: 25 15
No. of Words: 348 350
No. of Characters: 1838 1500
No. of Different Words: 184 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.319 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.282 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.702 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 135 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 113 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 86 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 48 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 13.92 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.314 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.44 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.279 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.479 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.042 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, hence, however, if, may, moreover, so, still, therefore, well, to begin with, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 55.5748502994 76% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1896.0 2260.96107784 84% => OK
No of words: 348.0 441.139720559 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.44827586207 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31911543099 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76572361428 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 188.0 204.123752495 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.540229885057 0.468620217663 115% => OK
syllable_count: 593.1 705.55239521 84% => 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: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 13.0 22.8473053892 57% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.6030673404 57.8364921388 56% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 75.84 119.503703932 63% => OK
Words per sentence: 13.92 23.324526521 60% => More words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 4.36 5.70786347227 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => 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: 0.165638636573 0.218282227539 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.042144486907 0.0743258471296 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0422983512623 0.0701772020484 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0869595002155 0.128457276422 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.057882307203 0.0628817314937 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.2 14.3799401198 78% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 49.82 48.3550499002 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.74 12.5979740519 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.46 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 98.500998004 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 5.5 12.3882235529 44% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 7.2 11.1389221557 65% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 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.