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.
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 conclusion based on the study in Oceania University is totally flawed in many accounts. It not only shows the bias in choosing the subjects for the study but also a result with a weak base for luring new professors to the university. Furthermore it ignores the intrinsic reasons for the professors to leave the university as well as focuses only on singular point to enhance their faculty strength deficiencies.
Firstly, the attention goes straight to the subjects under this particular study. It showed that when professors are offered free-tuition for their own college-aged children at the university, they tend to stay back. This means majority of the professors who participated in this study were on experienced side and had college-aged children. Naturally when they were offered free-tuition policy, they decided to stay back and thus it resulted in an increment in retention. Hence, this study completely ignores the younger population of the professors in the university who, in most cases, won't be having children of this age and hence won't benefit from the policy. This makes the result of the study biased and flawed.
Secondly, a university with its experienced faculty, is also known for its young and dynamic professors who are eager to make contributions in teaching and research. The study done here shows that the university was facing a lot of professors leaving it for joining elsewhere. It also ignore the fact that there are other reasons for professors to leave the university such as work environment, salary, quality of resources for research, etc. Hence the conclusion drawn form this study will not help the university very largely and is a weak hypothesis.
Finally, the study has not given the clear cut points on which the observation happened. They have not mentioned the age group, the opinions of the professors, the time period of the study and ratio of gender. It also seems to target only one point of the problem rather than looking at other points in the system, which makes it incredulous.
Now in order to improve the retention rate, for which the study was conducted, the university should hold a meeting with the current faculties and listen to their problems. They should make a core committee compromising of the management as well as representatives from the professors and propose viable resolutions to the depleting retention rate. They can propose enhanced salary system, improving lab conditions, providing more flexibility in the decisions regarding classes to be taken by the professors,etc.
In the end, such improvements will help the universities in their retention rate, but the current result of the study and the study itself isn't a good place to start with. it is completely flawed and neglects a major portion of the professor population and their problems.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 239, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Furthermore,
...uring new professors to the university. Furthermore it ignores the intrinsic reasons for th...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 286, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'ignores'?
Suggestion: ignores
...aving it for joining elsewhere. It also ignore the fact that there are other reasons f...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 508, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , etc
...ng classes to be taken by the professors,etc. In the end, such improvements will ...
^^^^
Line 11, column 140, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...esult of the study and the study itself isnt a good place to start with. it is compl...
^^^^
Line 11, column 173, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: It
...itself isnt a good place to start with. it is completely flawed and neglects a maj...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, firstly, furthermore, hence, look, regarding, second, secondly, so, thus, well, such as, as well as, in most cases, to start with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.6327345309 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.9520958084 39% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 55.5748502994 101% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2376.0 2260.96107784 105% => OK
No of words: 462.0 441.139720559 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.14285714286 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.63618218583 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89327474908 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 204.123752495 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.487012987013 0.468620217663 104% => OK
syllable_count: 743.4 705.55239521 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 4.96107784431 262% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.7884804015 57.8364921388 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.142857143 119.503703932 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 23.324526521 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.42857142857 5.70786347227 130% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.302090391611 0.218282227539 138% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0884731932216 0.0743258471296 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0626318917713 0.0701772020484 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.147110385242 0.128457276422 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0571133655465 0.0628817314937 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 14.3799401198 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.42 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 98.500998004 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.