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 less 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.
In order to curb the increasing trend in cheating in colleges and universities, Groveton college has adopted an honour code which believes the authenticity of students agreeing not to cheat and to notify teachers if there is suspect of another student doing so. It is reported that such an installation has greatly reduced the number of cases of cheating being reported each year as compared to the earlier system in which teachers monitored students. Majority of students in that college have claimed that they are less likely to cheat with the honor code in place. It has been recommended that this system is implemented in all other colleges, but before doing so, a few questions need to be answered.
Firstly, there no reason provided as to why the earlier system of teachers monitoring the students has been abolished. Such reasoning would help us understand why the system of honour code was installed in the first place. was it found that the teachers are falsely accusing students of cheating or were there any other cases of misconduct?
Secondly, the decrease in the of the number of cases of cheating being reported does not necessarily imply that cheating levels have dropped. It might be the case that the earlier system was more efficient in weeding out the cheaters than the current system.
Thirdly, there seems to be no provision to check the extent to which the honour code is being truthfully followed by all students. Every person tweaks the rules when they know the law lies with them. Many students in college place friendship over honour code so a particular student may rat out suspects who cheat but will not report cases involving his friends. They may also falsely accuse students who they bear an animosity towards. Moreover, it says that the majority of students, not all, say that they are less likely to cheat with the honour code in place. The minority might not be of the same opinion are may be more prone to cheating.
Finally, even if the students of Groveton are morally saintly, it does not mean that students of other universities will not take advantage of the honour code and will rather make cheating more rampant. Therefore, the above questions need to be addressed in order to make the implementation of the honour code system reasonable elsewhere.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 390 350
No. of Characters: 1870 1500
No. of Different Words: 179 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.444 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.795 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.48 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 130 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 102 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 74 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 30 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.375 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.276 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.75 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.356 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.582 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.096 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
In order to curb the increasing trend in...
^^^
Line 4, column 224, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Was
... code was installed in the first place. was it found that the teachers are falsely ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, firstly, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, third, thirdly, as to, in the first place
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 : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 55.5748502994 97% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 16.3942115768 12% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1917.0 2260.96107784 85% => OK
No of words: 390.0 441.139720559 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.91538461538 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44391917772 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55720739571 2.78398813304 92% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 204.123752495 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.469230769231 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 593.1 705.55239521 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => 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: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.2178196378 57.8364921388 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.764705882 119.503703932 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.9411764706 23.324526521 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.94117647059 5.70786347227 139% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.33819123309 0.218282227539 155% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.117145134538 0.0743258471296 158% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.119555081929 0.0701772020484 170% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.199276258017 0.128457276422 155% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.108183254634 0.0628817314937 172% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.3550499002 119% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.09 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 98.500998004 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.