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.
A letter from the faculty committee to the president of Seatown University highlights a study conducted at nearby Oceania University wherein the high faculty retention is attributed to a program that has been employed by the university. At Oceania University, professors are offered free tuition at the university for their own college aged children. Therefore, the faculty committee suggests that Seatown University should employee the same program to enhance morale among faculty and to lure new professors. The suggestion by the faculty committee of Seatown University seems legible in the first reading. Although a few alternate possibilities can prove the committee's suggestion baseless and fallacious.
Firstly, did the faculty committee compare the financial status of both the universities? What if Oceania University is financially stable to employee such a policy? This could explain why Oceania University can impart tuition-free education to the kids of the faculties that teach there. What if Seatown University is not equivalent to Oceanic University in terms of financial stability? This would mean that employing such a policy at Seatown University could pose financial ramifications to the university. And hence, it would not be ideal to introduce such a policy at Seatown University.
Secondly, the faculty committee cites that a high faculty retention at Oceania University is directly related to the free-tuition policy employed by Oceania University and hence, employing the same policy at Seatown University can give similar results. What if the policy employed by Oceania University is one of the many perks that the university provides to it's faculties? This would mean that employing the same policy at Seatown University might not be effective towards maintain a high faculty retention rate.
Lastly, the faculty committee states that instituting a free-tuition policy at Seatown University will boost the morale among faculties and help lure more professors to the university. The faculty committee fails to provide a proof or an evidence that states that introducing a free-tuition policy improves faculty morale. What if the teaching facilities at Seatown University is not ideal or state-of-the-art? This could mean that even after the introduction of free-tuition policy, the faculty morale may still be low. Moreover, poor infrastructure would also dissuade new professors form joining the university.Such an instance would be contrary to what the faculty committee claim.
In sum, the above study conducted by the faculty committee at Seatown University seems incomplete. Moreover, it fails to convince the reader that employing a free-tuition policy would benefit Seatown University.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 412 350
No. of Characters: 2272 1500
No. of Different Words: 171 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.505 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.515 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.968 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 186 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 161 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 107 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 85 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.619 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.855 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.619 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.429 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.587 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.162 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 662, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'committees'' or 'committee's'?
Suggestion: committees'; committee's
...w alternate possibilities can prove the committees suggestion baseless and fallacious. ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 475, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...niversity might not be effective towards maintain a high faculty retention rate. ...
^^
Line 7, column 232, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...culty committee fails to provide a proof or an evidence that states that introduc...
^^
Line 7, column 616, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Such
... professors form joining the university.Such an instance would be contrary to what t...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, if, lastly, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, still, therefore
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.6327345309 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 55.5748502994 85% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2320.0 2260.96107784 103% => OK
No of words: 410.0 441.139720559 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.65853658537 5.12650576532 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49982852243 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.09627782142 2.78398813304 111% => OK
Unique words: 170.0 204.123752495 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.414634146341 0.468620217663 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 755.1 705.55239521 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59920159681 113% => 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: 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: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 46.4320633607 57.8364921388 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.476190476 119.503703932 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5238095238 23.324526521 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.71428571429 5.70786347227 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 12.0 4.67664670659 257% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.552710654635 0.218282227539 253% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.217030432683 0.0743258471296 292% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.124587360751 0.0701772020484 178% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.379909937298 0.128457276422 296% => Maybe some contents are duplicated.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0949310600191 0.0628817314937 151% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 14.3799401198 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.27 48.3550499002 73% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.55 12.5979740519 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.89 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 98.500998004 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.