The data from a survey of high school math and science teachers show that in the district of Sanlee many of these teachers reported assigning daily homework, whereas in the district of Marlee, most science and math teachers reported assigning homework no more than two or three days per week. Despite receiving less frequent homework assignments, Marlee students earn better grades overall and are less likely to be required to repeat a year of school than are students in Sanlee. These results call into question the usefulness of frequent homework assignments. Most likely the Marlee students have more time to concentrate on individual assignments than do the Sanlee students who have homework every day. Therefore teachers in our high schools should assign homework no more than twice a week.
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 author recommends for the science and math teachers in the high schools to assign homework to the students no more than twice a week. He provides example of science and math teachers of the district of Marlee, who use to assign homework no more than two or three days per week and their students are attaining better grades overall. However, before evaluating the argument, specific evidences must be provided for the following three cases.
First of all, it is important to evaluate whether the science and math teachers of Sanlee district are comparable to the respective subject teachers of Marlee district. The author, without any evidence, assumes that teaching quality of the teachers of both of the districts is identical. However, this may not be the case. Perhaps after proper investigation, it may be found out that the science and math teachers of Marlee district have higher educational degrees than Sanlee district. Moreover, they have a very lucid and articulate teaching style which attracts the students a lot and they learn better. The argument fails to provide enough evidence for this case and so is seriously flawed.
Secondly, it is very important to evaluate whether the overall quality of the students of Sanlee district and Marlee district are comparable. The author prematurely assumes that students of both of these districts have the same quality and learning skills. In reality, this may not be true. It is quite likely that students from Marlee district are very attentive; they learn in an enthusiastic manner, consult with the teachers to understand complex study topics, very much eager to learn new things. On the other side, students of Sanlee district are very much apathetic towards studies; they waste most of their study time. If this is the case, then the argument will lose its ground.
Finally, it is important to evaluate whether the science and math teachers of Sanlee district assign intuitive homework to the students every day. The author assumes that the homework assignments assigned by the teachers of Sanlee district are of same level of quality to the assignments assigned by the teachers of Marlee district. It is very much possible that the assignment quality done by the students of Sanlee district are too much poor. They don’t do them using their inherent talent and skills rather they complete it taking help from others as the assignments seem too much tiresome and boring to the students. If this evidence has merit, then the argument will not hold water.
In conclusion, the argument, as it stands, is seriously weakened as it relies on unwarranted assumptions which may be proved to be invalid later. If the author is able to provide enough evidences for the above stated three cases and conduct a much thorough and careful study, then the argument can be evaluated properly and the recommendation to assign homework no more than twice a week can be taken into consideration. Otherwise the argument will remain severely faulty as it stands on the surface.
Comments
e-rater score 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: 23 15
No. of Words: 502 350
No. of Characters: 2469 1500
No. of Different Words: 207 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.733 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.918 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.527 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 195 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 145 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 107 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 37 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.826 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.309 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.565 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.334 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.516 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.1 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 219, Rule ID: USE_TO_VERB[1]
Message: Did you mean 'used'?
Suggestion: used
...teachers of the district of Marlee, who use to assign homework no more than two or ...
^^^
Line 3, column 600, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to better', 'to well'
Suggestion: to better; to well
...racts the students a lot and they learn better. The argument fails to provide enough e...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 377, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an enthusiastic manner" with adverb for "enthusiastic"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...district are very attentive; they learn in an enthusiastic manner, consult with the teachers to understan...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 422, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Otherwise,
...a week can be taken into consideration. Otherwise the argument will remain severely fault...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 502, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ely faulty as it stands on the surface.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, thus, in conclusion, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 11.1786427146 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 34.0 28.8173652695 118% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 55.5748502994 103% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2536.0 2260.96107784 112% => OK
No of words: 501.0 441.139720559 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.0618762475 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.73107062784 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59996264162 2.78398813304 93% => OK
Unique words: 217.0 204.123752495 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.433133732535 0.468620217663 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 782.1 705.55239521 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 4.96107784431 262% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.6048218804 57.8364921388 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.260869565 119.503703932 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7826086957 23.324526521 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.5652173913 5.70786347227 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.368362210085 0.218282227539 169% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.118991574051 0.0743258471296 160% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.138727277036 0.0701772020484 198% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.228733098866 0.128457276422 178% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.118317573795 0.0628817314937 188% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.7 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 98.500998004 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.