Evidence suggests that academic honor codes, which call for students to agree not to cheat in their academic endeavors and to notify a faculty member if they suspect that others have cheated, are far more successful than are other methods at deterring cheating among students at colleges and universities. Several years ago, Groveton College adopted such a code and discontinued its old-fashioned system in which teachers closely monitored students. Under the old 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.
The concept of honor codes seems to be a biased system of accepting to cheating. The author states that each individual reports oneself or others if they have cheated, however, the author forgets to throw light on the not so genuine candidates.
One scenario would be if the student who is cheating is not committing to the offense. This scenario might be attributed with the way a child has been taught and brought up. It is true that as kids we were taught a proverb 'Honesty is the best policy', however, how many of us are inclined to this proverb? The seeds of honesty should be sowed as kids and in every kid. Only few students being honest and others being dishonest might put the honest student to a greater disadvantage.
The next scenario would be of student rivalry, where a particular student might be reported just because of personal conflicts. Though the student who had been reported might be genuine, it would take a lot of effort from the individual to clear his / her name which is unnecessary. This scenario is a real time practice these days especially among close competitors. The intention might not be to deter the name of the person but simply to put the person into hardship and distract them.A few months distraction of clearing his / her name might have a negative impact on his / her score and lead to the advantage of the student who complained. Any actions for false allegation is not discussed by the author.
The statistics provided seems to be vague since the number of students enrolled in the course for a particular year could have been lesser, that is, the teacher could have found 30 out of 100 students and the students reporting could have been 20 out of 90 or 14 out of 50, in which case the percentage of students who are cheating is more or less same or even increased by the years.
In conclusion, it is best if an unbiased individual is employed to monitor students so that every individual is given a fair trial.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 489, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: A
... person into hardship and distract them.A few months distraction of clearing his ...
^
Line 5, column 495, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'months'' or 'month's'?
Suggestion: months'; month's
...n into hardship and distract them.A few months distraction of clearing his / her name ...
^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'however', 'if', 'so', 'in conclusion', 'it is true', 'more or less']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.215425531915 0.25644967241 84% => OK
Verbs: 0.188829787234 0.15541462614 122% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0771276595745 0.0836205057962 92% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0398936170213 0.0520304965353 77% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0345744680851 0.0272364105082 127% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.117021276596 0.125424944231 93% => OK
Participles: 0.0718085106383 0.0416121511921 173% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.5623362173 2.79052419416 92% => OK
Infinitives: 0.031914893617 0.026700313972 120% => OK
Particles: 0.00265957446809 0.001811407834 147% => OK
Determiners: 0.122340425532 0.113004496875 108% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0345744680851 0.0255425247493 135% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0239361702128 0.0127820249294 187% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1966.0 2731.13054187 72% => OK
No of words: 352.0 446.07635468 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.58522727273 6.12365571057 91% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33147354134 4.57801047555 95% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.303977272727 0.378187486979 80% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.235795454545 0.287650121315 82% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.170454545455 0.208842608468 82% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.0795454545455 0.135150697306 59% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5623362173 2.79052419416 92% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 207.018472906 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.517045454545 0.469332199767 110% => OK
Word variations: 55.0035886965 52.1807786196 105% => OK
How many sentences: 14.0 20.039408867 70% => OK
Sentence length: 25.1428571429 23.2022227129 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 86.2866603543 57.7814097925 149% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.428571429 141.986410481 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.1428571429 23.2022227129 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.5 0.724660767414 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 3.58251231527 56% => OK
Readability: 48.7224025974 51.9672348444 94% => OK
Elegance: 1.53535353535 1.8405768891 83% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.167846293587 0.441005458295 38% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.104138076257 0.135418324435 77% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0675874365026 0.0829849096947 81% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.5905928257 0.58762219726 101% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.231374344283 0.147661913831 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0768529929252 0.193483328276 40% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0492391912913 0.0970749176394 51% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.314200640814 0.42659136922 74% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.131435933253 0.0774707102158 170% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.128960132542 0.312017818177 41% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0386334856155 0.0698173142475 55% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.33743842365 72% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.87684729064 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.82512315271 62% => OK
Positive topic words: 4.0 6.46551724138 62% => OK
Negative topic words: 5.0 5.36822660099 93% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.82389162562 35% => OK
Total topic words: 10.0 14.657635468 68% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.