Essay topics: The following is an excerpt from a letter sent by the principal of Greenwood School to the parents of all incoming kindergartners.
"We have decided to institute a policy of all-day kindergarten, instead of half-day kindergarten, for all students at Greenwood School. All-day kindergarten will help all our students achieve at their highest levels. The classes will be 'tracked'; so that average students are together, but high-achieving and low-achieving students will be put together in classes. In this way, the high-achieving students will be able to help pull the low-achieving students up to their level, so that no student falls behind. The all-day kindergarten classes will cover the same material previously covered in the half-day kindergarten classes, but will go at a slower speed to accommodate learning differences. In addition, the students will receive extra instruction in music, art, and physical education. One of the greatest benefits of the plan, however, is that students will be in a structured environment for longer hours, reducing the numbers of hours that otherwise would be wasted at home or in day care."
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The argument is about institute a policy of full-day kindergarten instead of half-day kindergarten to help the students achieving their highest level. The argument based on unwarranted assumptions and flawed for the following situation.
First of all, the author assumed that a full day school better than a half-day and helps make the students high achieving. The author does not provide any survey that the model is successful. it would be possible that that model failed at other schools. The author also does not provide any information about what were the flaws in the previous system.
The author claimed that the classes will be tracked so that average together in class and low and high achieving students together in a class. The assumption that the high achieving student helps low achieving student. The author does not provide in any information about on what basis the students categorized as low, average and high achieving. Students could bad at certain things, students bad at physical education could be good at study and music. The low achieving students might need the help of a teacher rather than the help of their classmates. Also, differentiate average students from the other students could hinders the overall growth of average students.
The author also claimed that the full-day kindergarten cover same material and students also received extra music, art, and education classes and also go slower speed to cover the differences, because the author assumed that students wasted extra hours at home or in daycare. The author does not provide any information about, on what basis the author concludes that the rest of the day was wasted. Also, the author does not provide any information was the previous speed and classes were not enough or parents complain about the classes. It might possible that stretching extra classes will be fatal. It might be possible that students attend extra classes once they went home. So, it is an unreasonable assumption that students waste their time at home or daycare.
The following argument is flawed and based on unfeasible reasons. The argument failed to provide any convincing data that prove that full day kinder garden better than half day. The author should provide more data to bolster the argument.
Comments
Essay evaluation 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: 20 15
No. of Words: 371 350
No. of Characters: 1865 1500
No. of Different Words: 145 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.389 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.027 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.489 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 137 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 105 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 68 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 34 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.55 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.56 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.35 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.361 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.361 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.154 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 193, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: It
...ny survey that the model is successful. it would be possible that that model faile...
^^
Line 3, column 144, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...achieving students together in a class. The assumption that the high achieving stud...
^^^
Line 3, column 220, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ng student helps low achieving student. The author does not provide in any informat...
^^^
Line 3, column 624, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'could' requires the base form of the verb: 'hinder'
Suggestion: hinder
... students from the other students could hinders the overall growth of average students....
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 178, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...day kinder garden better than half day. The author should provide more data to bols...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, if, so, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.6327345309 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 55.5748502994 61% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1906.0 2260.96107784 84% => OK
No of words: 371.0 441.139720559 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.13746630728 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38877662729 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.54049096572 2.78398813304 91% => OK
Unique words: 154.0 204.123752495 75% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.415094339623 0.468620217663 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 576.0 705.55239521 82% => 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: 15.0 8.76447105788 171% => 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: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 46.7307140667 57.8364921388 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.7619047619 119.503703932 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.6666666667 23.324526521 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.57142857143 5.70786347227 28% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => 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: 0.115641662968 0.218282227539 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0404715107669 0.0743258471296 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0716193978082 0.0701772020484 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.10042989119 0.128457276422 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0846395616029 0.0628817314937 135% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 14.3799401198 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.3550499002 112% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.33 8.32208582834 88% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 98.500998004 68% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 12.3882235529 52% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.