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 en

Essay topics:

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.

Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.

The following argument is flawed for numerous reasons. Primarily,it is based on the unwarranted assumption that Groveton College has successfully reduced student cheating by adopting an honor code, rendering its main conclusion that,

all colleges and universities should adopt honor codes similar to Groveton's in order to decrease cheating among students, invalid.

Firstly, the argument states without evidence, that adoption of an honor code, by Groveton's college, 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, has to lead to a considerable decline in the number of cheating cases. It fails to point the fact that, if students agree not to cheat in the examination, doesn't guarntee that they will maintain their intergrity as promised. The students who already cheated in the examination, may continue to do that in future as well, additionally such students, who themselves cheat, might not even contribute to report a single cheating case to thier faculty member, as they are the one involved in that too.

To support this argument, the author further gives statistical data for the comparison of previous scenario, in which teachers closely monitored students and the current scenario, replaced with the honor code. Under the obsolete system, teachers reported an average of thirty cases of cheating per year which has actually declined to twenty-one cases of cheating, reported by the students in the first year and had further dropped to fourteen, after five years. This evidence clearly opposes that writer's statement.

Finally, the author mentions a recent survey, arguing that a majority of Groveton students said that they would be less likely to cheat with an honor code in place than without. This leaves a lot of space for doubt. There is no information provided about the number of students ionvolved in the survey and the type of questions asked. The survey may have been ten pages long, with only two questions about the honor code. ALso, the students involved may be the one who never cheated, or the one who are less likely to cheat with an honor coede, neglecting the one who even cheat with the honor code in place. Had the author mentioned about the percentage of students participation and the typeof questions asked in the survey, the survey could have taken into consideration.

In general, the writer fails to make a convincing argument beacuse of a lack of statistical data and evidence provided to make its point. The argument could have strengthened, if the author provide information regarding the facts. Finally, it ends with an optimistic conclusion that based on wishy-washy observations, that are likely to be incorrect.

Votes
Average: 4.2 (3 votes)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 65, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , it
...s flawed for numerous reasons. Primarily,it is based on the unwarranted assumption ...
^^^
Line 1, column 234, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ode, rendering its main conclusion that, all colleges and universities should ado...
^^^^
Line 7, column 405, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... agree not to cheat in the examination, doesnt guarntee that they will maintain their ...
^^^^^^
Line 11, column 498, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
...ars. This evidence clearly opposes that writers statement. Finally, the author men...
^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, first, firstly, if, may, regarding, so, then, well, as to, in conclusion, in general

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 19.6327345309 51% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 21.0 13.6137724551 154% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 68.0 55.5748502994 122% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2332.0 2260.96107784 103% => OK
No of words: 448.0 441.139720559 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.20535714286 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.60065326758 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72536416162 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 223.0 204.123752495 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.497767857143 0.468620217663 106% => OK
syllable_count: 721.8 705.55239521 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 85.5067127416 57.8364921388 148% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.176470588 119.503703932 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.3529411765 23.324526521 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.70588235294 5.70786347227 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.453736140738 0.218282227539 208% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.124824578678 0.0743258471296 168% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.122970988409 0.0701772020484 175% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.236124527703 0.128457276422 184% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.119189975784 0.0628817314937 190% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 14.3799401198 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 48.3550499002 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.23 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.09 8.32208582834 109% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 98.500998004 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 12.3882235529 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 450 350
No. of Characters: 2258 1500
No. of Different Words: 214 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.606 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.018 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.641 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 162 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 132 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 99 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 43 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.854 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.556 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.316 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.594 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.063 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5