The argument presented here takes up a key observation but does not study clearly it's implications. It provides a conclusion which cannot be supported by the evidence presented here.
It is essential for students to provide feedback on the classroom teaching and also on the behaviour of the lecturers in the class room to develop a conducive environment. When the author mentions that the grades have risen because the professors of Omega university are providing higher grades, he forgets to discuss about the change in the quality of class room teaching which could have helped in students doing better in examinations.
The author mentions about the beliefs or thoughts of the potential employers who feel that the grades are inflated. Linking this to the success rate of getting job offers is not adequate because, the students of Omega university may lack communication skills or their syllabus may not be adequate to match the competitiveness of the students from Alpha university which could be the key reason and it needs to be addressed immediately. Since,the author does not mention about the decrease in success rate of placements, it raises a question, did the percentage of students getting placed improve over the previous year? If it did this can invalidate the reason cited to end the feedback system mentioned.
The argument forgets to mention anything about the toughness of question papers that were set post this feedback system got established. Meaning that the professors could have lower the standards of the examinations to meet the goals of achieving a positive feedback. But this is a major flaw which needs to be addressed and it looks analogous to reducing the hospital bill but not improving the standards of treatment or the hospital.
Majorly,the study ignores the need to improve the standard of teaching and the quality of syllabus the professors and given the lack of convincing evidence linking the role of evaluation mechanism supporting the drop in quality of students, the conclusion to withdraw the evaluation mechanism cannot be the taken based on the evidence presented.
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 12 15
No. of Words: 345 350
No. of Characters: 1748 1500
No. of Different Words: 163 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.31 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.067 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.78 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 132 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 111 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 86 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 48 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 28.75 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 13.839 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.417 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.348 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.652 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.095 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 442, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , the
...needs to be addressed immediately. Since,the author does not mention about the decre...
^^^^
Line 6, column 621, 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.
... placed improve over the previous year? If it did this can invalidate the reason c...
^^
Line 11, column 8, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , the
...f treatment or the hospital. Majorly,the study ignores the need to improve the s...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, look, may, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.6327345309 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 28.8173652695 59% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 55.5748502994 86% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1786.0 2260.96107784 79% => OK
No of words: 343.0 441.139720559 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.20699708455 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30351707066 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8781963647 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 204.123752495 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.489795918367 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 550.8 705.55239521 78% => 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: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 19.7664670659 61% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 28.0 22.8473053892 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 85.5921774074 57.8364921388 148% => OK
Chars per sentence: 148.833333333 119.503703932 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.5833333333 23.324526521 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.33333333333 5.70786347227 41% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.143482607405 0.218282227539 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0440458850136 0.0743258471296 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0545002172951 0.0701772020484 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0708278940331 0.128457276422 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0589522641317 0.0628817314937 94% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.4 14.3799401198 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.06 48.3550499002 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.53 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.17 8.32208582834 110% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 98.500998004 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 11.1389221557 119% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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.