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 letter from the faculty committee to the president of Seatown University states the argument that offered a free tuition at the university for their own college-aged children will increase the faculty retention in the University and will also help in luring new professors may seems tenable at first glance. However, the conclusion relies on the assumption for which there is no clear evidence, which makes this argument tenuous.
The primary concern with the premises is that the author fails to give a clear legitimate evidentiary support, that the declivity in the number of professors in the Seatown University is just due to the fact that their children not offered free tuition at the university. The author fails to take other factors into account and assay it properly. This might be due to not easy accessibility of Seatown University, university is located in remote area, due to which many professors find it difficult to reach Seatown University. There might be other factors also such that due to wages they are given, harsh climate and much more. The author should consider all the possible factors into account in order to strengthen the argument.
In Addition, the author fails to explain the link between the Oceania University and Seatown University, that he assumes exists and weakens his argument. The study was conducted at nearby Oceania University, this might be possible that the professors at Oceania University don't have same thinking and penchant as in Seatown University professors. It is not cogent to say that the professors at the Seatown University also want a free tuition at the university for their own college-aged children.
However, it is not to say that his whole argument is without base, well he has some key issues in his argument, but he holds a valid point that this will surely help other professors to join Seatown University.
In sum, the author irrational argument is invalid as there are many flaws in his assumption and unsubstantiated premises like failing to explain a link between Oceania University and Seatown University, and mot taking other factors in account while conducting a study on Oceania University.
If author wish to change the readers ming he has to largely reconstruct his argument, fix the flaws in premises and remove the assumptions, in order to convince the president of Seatown University.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 187, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... professors in the Seatown University is just due to the fact that their children...
^^
Line 5, column 274, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...at the professors at Oceania University dont have same thinking and penchant as in S...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, so, then, well, while, as to, in addition
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 : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 28.8173652695 108% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 55.5748502994 94% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1993.0 2260.96107784 88% => OK
No of words: 388.0 441.139720559 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.13659793814 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.43821085614 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79074445205 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 167.0 204.123752495 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.430412371134 0.468620217663 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 637.2 705.55239521 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 19.7664670659 66% => 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: 29.0 22.8473053892 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 72.2909145838 57.8364921388 125% => OK
Chars per sentence: 153.307692308 119.503703932 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.8461538462 23.324526521 128% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.92307692308 5.70786347227 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.39335298905 0.218282227539 180% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.143984998879 0.0743258471296 194% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.142270928725 0.0701772020484 203% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.201785069453 0.128457276422 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.143476011325 0.0628817314937 228% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.7 14.3799401198 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.04 48.3550499002 87% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.197005988 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.12 12.5979740519 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.96 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 98.500998004 72% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 19.5 12.3882235529 157% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.1389221557 122% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.