In the preceding argument, the author recommends that all colleges and universities to adopt the so called honor code system from Groveton college to deal with the issue of increasing cheating. The argument may sound tenable at face. However, upon careful scrutiny, the arguer commits a fallacy of oversimplification and the argument is full of premises.
First and foremost, the author claims that the honor code is beneficial compared to common system, for in the honor code system, students are supposed to report cheating behavior of other students to the teachers, so not teachers are supervising the students. The argument is based on a gratuitous assumption that all students are totally honest and report each cheating case they find to the teachers, which is, of course, unwarranted. It's more likely that some students who always cheat during exams are doing this together and they are hiding the truth for each other, so the teacher never know they are cheating. Thus, it is vividly clear that whether the honor code works as intended requires deeper investigation.
Furthermore, building upon the statistics that reported number of cheating cases was 21 and 14 during the first year the honor code was adopted and five years later, respectively, which is much lower than average number of 30 before the system was used, the author assert the honor code successfully decreases cheating among students. The data conspicuously lack promise. We don't know for sure if the lower number of cheating cases indeed results from less cheating or it is simply because many students are not reporting it. If the lack of monitor from faculties actually gives some students more chance of cheating without being found is doubtful.
Last but not least, citing the evidence that a recent survey shows most Groveton students believe they are much less likely to cheat with honor code, the author contends all universities should have the same system in place. Nevertheless, in absense of specific information about the survey, it's impossible for us to evaluate the argument. There's no information about who participated in the survey. A question might arise here is that a majority of students included in the survey are excellent students with great academic records that wouldn't cheat even without honor code. Obviously, a more thorough and long-term survey with all students from Groveton college included is needed.
To sum up, the conclusion reached in the argument lacks credibility as the evidence cited in the analysis does not lend strong support to what the arguer claims. Unless other possibilities mentioned above have been considered and ruled out, the conclusion that honor code effectively decreases cheating and recommendation that all colleges and universities should adopt the same system is unconvincing.
Essay evaluation report
Sentence: Nevertheless, in absense of specific information about the survey, it's impossible for us to evaluate the argument.
Error: absense Suggestion: absence
--------------------
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- not OK. maybe students would be less likely to cheat when closely monitored.
--------------------
also need to argue:
Thus, all colleges and universities should adopt honor codes similar to Grovetons in order to decrease cheating among students.
-------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 1 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 454 350
No. of Characters: 2323 1500
No. of Different Words: 226 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.616 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.117 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.678 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 173 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 125 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 100 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 39 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.222 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.457 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.722 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.327 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.566 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.112 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 376, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...The data conspicuously lack promise. We dont know for sure if the lower number of ch...
^^^^
Line 5, column 527, 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.
...use many students are not reporting it. If the lack of monitor from faculties actu...
^^
Line 7, column 341, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: There's
...ssible for us to evaluate the argument. Theres no information about who participated i...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 539, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wouldn't
...udents with great academic records that wouldnt cheat even without honor code. Obviousl...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, furthermore, however, if, may, nevertheless, so, thus, of course, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.9520958084 31% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 55.5748502994 97% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2377.0 2260.96107784 105% => OK
No of words: 452.0 441.139720559 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25884955752 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.61088837703 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7444358093 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 232.0 204.123752495 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.513274336283 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 736.2 705.55239521 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 75.8872010549 57.8364921388 131% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.055555556 119.503703932 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.1111111111 23.324526521 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.38888888889 5.70786347227 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.366325476453 0.218282227539 168% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.103977947048 0.0743258471296 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0816623448859 0.0701772020484 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.192637530273 0.128457276422 150% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0496365093152 0.0628817314937 79% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 14.3799401198 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.68 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 98.500998004 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.