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 makes several assumptions about Seatown University from the study conducted at nearby Oceania University. Whether we can reach to a conclusion from such study remains largely ambiguous.
Firstly, the study conducted at Oceania University which showed that faculty retention is higher if the professors are offered free tuition for their college-aged children- might not be true for Seatown University. For example, the tuition of Oceania University might be very high whereas the tuition of Seatown University might not be low. In this case, the professors would not be as reluctant to pay the tuition for their children. Therefore, offering free tuition for the children of Seatown University's professors will not help with the faculty retention as much in this scenario.
Furthermore, it is not clear the actual faculty retention rate of both Oceania Unievrsity and Seatown University. Faculty retention rate of the latter might be better than the faculty retention rate of the former. In this case, offering free tuition will not be auspicious for Seatown University.
Finally, it remains vague whether offering free tuition was the only factor contributing to Oceania University's higher faculty rate. There might be benefits for the professors involved. It might be that the town nearby Oceania University become very well developed or the housing prices may have declined, so a large numbers of professors decided to move in to the town.
In conclusion, since the argument makes several of these unwarranted assumptions, it fails to bring a convincing case. it will not be prudent for Oceania University to make a decision based on the
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 13 15
No. of Words: 262 350
No. of Characters: 1366 1500
No. of Different Words: 122 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.023 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.214 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.749 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 106 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 94 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 52 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 39 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.154 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.734 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.538 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.424 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.675 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.159 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 120, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Whether” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...conducted at nearby Oceania University. Whether we can reach to a conclusion from such ...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 120, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: It
...s, it fails to bring a convincing case. it will not be prudent for Oceania Univers...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, firstly, furthermore, if, may, so, therefore, well, whereas, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.6327345309 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 11.1786427146 18% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 13.6137724551 22% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 28.8173652695 49% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 55.5748502994 50% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1404.0 2260.96107784 62% => OK
No of words: 262.0 441.139720559 59% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.35877862595 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02323427807 4.56307096286 88% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82219841894 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 124.0 204.123752495 61% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.473282442748 0.468620217663 101% => OK
syllable_count: 444.6 705.55239521 63% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => 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: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.9929537335 57.8364921388 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.285714286 119.503703932 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.7142857143 23.324526521 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.71428571429 5.70786347227 135% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.472062946946 0.218282227539 216% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.183808979047 0.0743258471296 247% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.128447831387 0.0701772020484 183% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.255919245719 0.128457276422 199% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.112442068912 0.0628817314937 179% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.3799401198 92% => 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: 13.81 12.5979740519 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.96 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 98.500998004 58% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.