Fifteen years ago, Omega University implemented a new procedure that encouraged students to evaluate the teaching effectiveness of all their professors. Since that time, Omega professors have begun to assign higher grades in their classes, and overall student grade averages at Omega have risen by 30 percent. Potential employers, looking at this dramatic rise in grades, believe that grades at Omega are inflated and do not accurately reflect student achievement; as a result, Omega graduates have not been as successful at getting jobs as have graduates from nearby Alpha University. To enable its graduates to secure better jobs, Omega University should terminate student evaluation of professors.
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 argues to end the student evaluation of professors to enable its omega university graduates secure better job is based on vague information provided by him. There are many loopholes in this argument. How termination of evaluation process directly affect the success ratio in jobs? It is not clearly stated.
First of all the author has assumed that by implementing a new procedure for evaluation of professors in Omega university has led the overall grade of student risen by 30 percent. It clearly shows no connection between this two, because by new procedure the students are evaluating the teaching effectiveness of professors. It doesn’t imply that if processors have started giving good marks the teaching effectiveness has improved. Such as it could happen that as soon as the professors have started giving good grades the students have wrongly evaluated the teaching effectiveness. So to get effective response to it the termination is not a good option rather make sure that the evaluation process goes flawlessly.
Secondly, this new procedure has been applied fifteen years ago, and as we know course content are updating very often now a days. It became mandatory to change teaching style by professors and similarly the evaluation procedure. We can’t rely on the evaluation method which is fifteen year old.
The author has suggested that professors have started giving good grades because the evaluation procedure has been implemented. Maybe it has been happened that students earned those good grades by their own efforts and hardworking but the course content was inadequate to the further job perspective. So the author should first make sure the feasibility of course to confirm his argument.
Such evidence tends to weaken the argument and it can’t be validated. To validate authors argument, he/she must see that that the evaluating procedure are up to date, check whether the evaluation occurs flawlessly, and the course content should be adequate so that studying it they can succeed in job.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 328 350
No. of Characters: 1673 1500
No. of Different Words: 173 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.256 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.101 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: 99 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 70 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 48 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.294 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.682 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.529 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.324 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.566 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.114 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 120, Rule ID: NOW_A_DAYS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'nowadays'?
Suggestion: nowadays
... course content are updating very often now a days. It became mandatory to change teaching...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 124, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a day' or simply 'days'?
Suggestion: a day; days
...rse content are updating very often now a days. It became mandatory to change teaching...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 123, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: that
...idate authors argument, he/she must see that that the evaluating procedure are up to date...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, may, second, secondly, similarly, so, of course, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 31.0 28.8173652695 108% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 55.5748502994 56% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1729.0 2260.96107784 76% => OK
No of words: 326.0 441.139720559 74% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.3036809816 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24917287072 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88154389063 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 204.123752495 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.524539877301 0.468620217663 112% => OK
syllable_count: 544.5 705.55239521 77% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 51.6780022539 57.8364921388 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.705882353 119.503703932 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.1764705882 23.324526521 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.05882352941 5.70786347227 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
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: 0.316192190514 0.218282227539 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0930349751254 0.0743258471296 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0828195459521 0.0701772020484 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.155948022348 0.128457276422 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0966134246656 0.0628817314937 154% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 14.3799401198 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 48.3550499002 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.46 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.55 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 98.500998004 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 12.3882235529 73% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.