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 speaker claims that when the professors in Seatown University are offered free tuition for their college-aged children, there is a chance of higher retention of faculty. This claim is based on the scenario and conditions of Oceania University. But projecting the same condition on Seatown may not be valuable unless there are some legit reasons and substantiations behind this which is not enough here.
First of all, there is no statistical data that can present a good scenario of faculty retention. There is even no data about the number of teachers, what are their respective designations etc. There may have some other factors: the Ocenea University may have more funds for conducting research and projects. For being involved in those such projects, the retention is higher.
Furthermore, many teachers may not be married and have children yet in Seatown. There is no data of what number of teachers are married and have families, let alone the college-aged children. There may be more married teachers in Oceania University than Seatown with college-aged children.
Moreover, even if there is the policy of free tuition for college-aged children in Seatown, The guardian of the children have the choice to pick other university based on the facilities they offer. Only free tuition free is not the only factor to provide a great education for children, there should be also a number of other facilities like good library, great faculties, great study environment etc. SO only offering free tuition for children cannot lure new professors.
Again, only offering free tuition is not enough to lure professors. The Ocenea University may have a great professional environment for professors, great salaries, great research opportunities. Without ensuring these factors, only providing free education cannot only enhance the retention of the faculty.
In conclusion, to enhance morale among the faculty and to lure more new professors in Seatown, only the policy of free tuition for college-aged children of professor is not enough. There has to be more facilities and playing facts for the retention of faculty in Seatown University.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 341 350
No. of Characters: 1761 1500
No. of Different Words: 138 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.297 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.164 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.753 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 129 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 107 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 72 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 44 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.312 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.713 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.562 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.382 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.655 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.124 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, if, may, moreover, so, as to, in conclusion, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 13.6137724551 29% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 9.0 28.8173652695 31% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 55.5748502994 68% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1817.0 2260.96107784 80% => OK
No of words: 341.0 441.139720559 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.3284457478 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29722995808 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86461183765 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 145.0 204.123752495 71% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.425219941349 0.468620217663 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 569.7 705.55239521 81% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 44.0 57.8364921388 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.944444444 119.503703932 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.9444444444 23.324526521 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.88888888889 5.70786347227 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.252324968179 0.218282227539 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0947132298619 0.0743258471296 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0725851901045 0.0701772020484 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.149007632701 0.128457276422 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0623954156872 0.0628817314937 99% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 14.3799401198 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 48.3550499002 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.63 12.5979740519 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.77 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 98.500998004 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => 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.