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.
A recent report suggests that the number of cheating cases in colleges and universities is on a rise. The solution to such a problem, as suggested by the arguer, is adopting the methods followed by Groveton College. The arguer provides quantitative facts and evidences to back is recommendation. the evidences seem compelling during the first reading. But a closer look unearths a few alternate possibilities that could prove the arguer's recommendation, unreasonable.
Firstly, the arguer states that the students of Groveton College were made to abide by an honor code which means that the students agree not to cheat in their academic endeavors. What makes the arguer think that the students of other colleges and universities will also adhere to this code of honor? If the students resent this decision taken by their respective institutions. It can lead to widespread chaos within the college. It could have been possible that the kids in Groveton College were amenable enough to abide by such a decision made by their college. But such an honor code being implemented across all the colleges and universities seems like a difficult task to pull-off.
Secondly, students in colleges and universities are often known to pick-up fights and arguments with their peers. As a result, the vanquished individual will probably look to get back at his or her peer. Can the arguer be assured of the fact that the student who has reported his or her peer for allegedly cheating in the exam is honest? It can be possible that the student is falsely accusing the other student of cheating as an act of revenge. This could mean that the student who has been falsely accused will pay for the sins that he did not even commit. The honor code method could prove to be costly for a student if it is put to a wrong use.
Lastly, the arguer hints towards a review which suggests that most of the student in Groveton College claim that they are less likely to cheat with an honor code in place. The question here is that-how can the opinion of a student in Groveton College be compared to the opinion of a student from some other college or university? It can be possible that the students of other colleges are not in favor of honor code. Moreover, it could also be the case that other colleges have surveillance system, as well as stringent invigilators and norms to deter students from cheating. This could mean that the application of honor code in such an institution would be nothing but a redundant policy.
In sum, the evidence and alternate possibilities provided in the paragraphs above put into question the feasibility of the arguer's recommendation. The arguer should take a sound look upon all the possibilities and then come up with a more foolproof recommendation.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 472 350
No. of Characters: 2255 1500
No. of Different Words: 211 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.661 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.778 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.723 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 149 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 119 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 89 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 39 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.522 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.249 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.565 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.313 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.514 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.128 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 297, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
...nd evidences to back is recommendation. the evidences seem compelling during the fi...
^^^
Line 1, column 431, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'arguers'' or 'arguer's'?
Suggestion: arguers'; arguer's
...nate possibilities that could prove the arguers recommendation, unreasonable. Firstl...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 301, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...will also adhere to this code of honor? If the students resent this decision taken...
^^
Line 9, column 124, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'arguers'' or 'arguer's'?
Suggestion: arguers'; arguer's
...ut into question the feasibility of the arguers recommendation. The arguer should take ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, lastly, look, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, well, as a result, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 13.6137724551 147% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 28.8173652695 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 64.0 55.5748502994 115% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2303.0 2260.96107784 102% => OK
No of words: 472.0 441.139720559 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.87923728814 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.6610686524 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80197786748 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 208.0 204.123752495 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.440677966102 0.468620217663 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 729.0 705.55239521 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.5083055627 57.8364921388 56% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 95.9583333333 119.503703932 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.6666666667 23.324526521 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.66666666667 5.70786347227 82% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 6.88822355289 189% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.428703034348 0.218282227539 196% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.132137138551 0.0743258471296 178% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.122018468597 0.0701772020484 174% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.232650314186 0.128457276422 181% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.143509145392 0.0628817314937 228% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 14.3799401198 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.3550499002 125% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.02 12.5979740519 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.62 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 98.500998004 92% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 12.3882235529 73% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.