The following appeared in a letter from the faculty committee to the president of Seatown University:
A study conducted at nearby Oceania University showed that faculty retention is higher when professors are offered free tuition at the university for their own college-aged children. Therefore, Seatown should institute a free-tuition policy for its professors for the purpose of enhancing morale among the faculty and luring new professors.
The argument to the Seatown University president believes in faculty retention through free tuition to the children of the faculty members, thereby enhancing the morale among faculty and luring them to Seatown University. The argument, however, does not consider several other factors discussed later because of which prove it's weakness.
The study conducted at Oceania University is not very clear to the readers. What methods of the study led to the conclusion that Oceania faculty retains because of the free tuition to their own children? It could belie the actual reason for faculty retention. Probably, the faculty retention is because of the standard of education at Oceania and thereby the reputation it awards to the faculty members as perceived in the educational institutions across other state(s) or nation(s).
The argument only talks of higher faculty retention which is misleading. The faculty strength at Oceania might exceed that of other institutions and thus, when compared with other institutions, Seatown University in this case, the retention numbers are higher. Without quantifying the exact number of faculty members retaining their jobs at Oceania against the total count at both Universities, the argument remains vague.
The free tuition might only be a scheme offered, however, not all faculty members send their children to Oceania. Similarly, if this scheme is adopted at Seatown University, it does not guarantee the faculty will avail it. It also depends on the willingness of the faculty members in doing so. And so it may fail to lure new professors. The courses offered at Seatown University must be the ones the children are willing to undertake. Without that, the scheme is futile for some faculty. It may thus, falsify the claim that faculty retention depends on this scheme.
The argument in the letter to the president of Seatown University needs to be strengthened by quantifying the people on whom the study was performed, the faculty members who are availing the offer of free tuition for their children and the count of the faculty retaining their job at the Oceania University. Also, another study must be conducted that corroborates the interest of the Seatown University faculty in availing the scheme, and how many are flexible about it for their college-aged children.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 1, 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.
...because of which prove its weakness. The study conducted at Oceania University i...
^^^
Line 8, column 480, Rule ID: SOME_FACULTY[1]
Message: Use 'faculty members'.
Suggestion: faculty members
...out that, the scheme is futile for some faculty. It may thus, falsify the claim that fa...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, may, similarly, so, then, thus
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 55.5748502994 94% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1958.0 2260.96107784 87% => OK
No of words: 370.0 441.139720559 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.29189189189 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38581623665 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72233410787 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 170.0 204.123752495 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.459459459459 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 615.6 705.55239521 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Interrogative: 2.0 0.471057884232 425% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 70.7326735753 57.8364921388 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.777777778 119.503703932 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5555555556 23.324526521 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.72222222222 5.70786347227 48% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => 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: 0.459417992882 0.218282227539 210% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.155723245658 0.0743258471296 210% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0978514447027 0.0701772020484 139% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.29019270786 0.128457276422 226% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0436430751849 0.0628817314937 69% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 14.3799401198 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.3550499002 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.4 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.04 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 98.500998004 81% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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: 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.