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.
Although at first glance, the argument seems valid, it is based on dubious inferences and more evidence is needed to determine its validity. Specifically, the teaching style of the professors, changes in the intellectual ability of the student population, rankings of both colleges, and types of jobs students are applying to should all be taken into account.
The claim suggests that professors began to assign higher grades to their students as a result of the evaluation. However, the claim does not account for the fact that the evaluations may have encouraged professors to change their teaching style and become more involved in their students' success. Professors may have started holding more office hours, or offering extra help to those who needed it. They may have provided more extra credit or created more succinct and effective lectures, leading to higher student success. Thus, the increase in grade point averages may have been a result of better teaching and extra help, as opposed to an inaccurate reflection of student grades. Concurrently, there may have been in influx of new professors after the implementation of the evaluations, who had different teaching methods, more suitable for students to learn, than the older professors. This also could have led to more students enrolling in classes with the newer, "better" professors, resulting in higher grades. Thus, this weakens the argument that the evaluation led to an misrepresentation of the students' academic abilities.
Additionally, since the time the evaluation procedure was implemented to now, the student population has been recycled and is different from the initial students. These new students may be more intelligent or have different study habits that lead to greater success. Thus, the higher grades and increase in grade point averages cannot simply by imputed to the professors and would be representative of student achievement. If this is case, it weakens the argument that professors assign higher grades as a result of the evaluations.
Additionally, the jobs students are applying for should be taken into account, since they may be applying to jobs completely out of their range of abilities. If students from Omega university are applying to high level jobs straight out of college, it is unlikely that they will land the jobs. It could be possible that students from Alpha University are applying to lower level jobs, resulting in a higher success rate. Thus, it weakens the argument that students at Omega University are less successful than those at Alpha University.
Lastly, the relative rankings and environment of both schools should be considered. If, objectively, Alpha University is higher in rankings of universities, their students may have an advantage, not because of the students' skill level, but because of the university itself. In addition, Alpha University may also have a evaluation program, but their graduates still land jobs. As a result, we cannot conclude that eliminating the evaluation will change anything about Omega University. Thus, it weakens the argument that ridding the school and professors of the evaluation program will enable graduates to be more successful in finding jobs.
The claim is not presented cogently, thus more evidence is needed to determine whether or not the conclusion is valid. By analyzing teaching methods, professor and student rollovers, what jobs students are applying to, and the rankings and similarities between Omega and Alpha Universities, we can find more evidence to substantialize the argument.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1089, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...the argument that the evaluation led to an misrepresentation of the students acade...
^^
Line 8, column 215, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'students'' or 'student's'?
Suggestion: students'; student's
...y have an advantage, not because of the students skill level, but because of the univers...
^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 319, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...ddition, Alpha University may also have a evaluation program, but their graduates...
^
Line 8, column 593, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rs of the evaluation program will enable graduates to be more successful in findi...
^^
Line 10, column 80, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...us more evidence is needed to determine whether or not the conclusion is valid. By analyzing t...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, lastly, may, so, still, thus, in addition, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 12.9520958084 162% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 11.1786427146 179% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 28.8173652695 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 69.0 55.5748502994 124% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 16.3942115768 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3026.0 2260.96107784 134% => OK
No of words: 560.0 441.139720559 127% => OK
Chars per words: 5.40357142857 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.8645985582 4.56307096286 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97075670632 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 234.0 204.123752495 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.417857142857 0.468620217663 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 947.7 705.55239521 134% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 4.96107784431 262% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 2.70958083832 295% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.2807732419 57.8364921388 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.04 119.503703932 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4 23.324526521 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.4 5.70786347227 60% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.313334723955 0.218282227539 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0978461931092 0.0743258471296 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0587080020894 0.0701772020484 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.162370296481 0.128457276422 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0665927755224 0.0628817314937 106% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 14.3799401198 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.3550499002 84% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.34 12.5979740519 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.39 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 130.0 98.500998004 132% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 12.3882235529 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => 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.