The following appeared in a memorandum from a dean at Omega University.
"Fifteen years ago, Omega University implemented a new procedure that encouraged
students to evaluate the teaching effectiveness of all their professors. Since that time, Omega
professors have begun to assign higher grades in their classes, and overall student grade
averages at Omega have risen by thirty percent. Potential employers apparently believe the
grades at Omega are inflated; this would explain why Omega graduates have not been as
successful at getting jobs as have graduates from nearby Alpha University. To enable its
graduates to secure better jobs, Omega University should now terminate student evaluation of
professors."
about the number or percentage of Omega146
students who participate in the procedure. Lacking such evidence it is entirely possible that
those numbers are insignificant, in which case terminating the procedure is unlikely to have
any effect on the grade average of Omega students or their success in getting jobs after
graduation.
The argument also assumes unfairly that the grade-average increase is the result of the
evaluation procedure--rather than some other phenomenon. The dean ignores a host of other
possible explanations for the increase--such as a trend at Omega toward higher admission
standards, or higher quality instruction or facilities. Without ruling out all other possible
explanations for the grade-average increase, the dean cannot convince me that by terminating
the evaluation procedure Omega would curb its perceived grade inflation let alone help its
graduates get jobs.
Even if the evaluation procedure has resulted in grade inflation at Omega, the dean's claim
that grade inflation explains why Omega graduates are less successful than Alpha graduates
in getting jobs is unjustified. The dean overlooks a myriad of other possible reasons for
Omega's comparatively poor job-placement record. Perhaps Omega's career services are
inadequate; or perhaps Omega's curriculum does not prepare students for the job market as
effectively as Alpha's. In short, without accounting for other factors that might contribute to
Omega graduates' comparative lack of success in getting jobs, the dean cannot justify the
claim that if Omega curbs its grade inflation employers will be more likely to hire Omega
graduates.
Finally, even if the dean can substantiate all of the foregoing assumptions, the dean's
assertion that Omega must terminate its evaluation procedure to enable its graduates to find
better jobs is still unwarranted, in two respects. First, the dean ignores other possible ways by
which Omega can increase its job-placement record--for example, by improving its public
relations or career-counseling services. Second, the dean unfairly equates "more" jobs with
"better" jobs. In other words, even if more Omega graduates are able to find jobs as a result of
the dean's recommended course of action, the kinds of jobs Omega graduates find would not
necessarily be better ones.
In sum, the dean's argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To strengthen it the dean must
provide better evidence that the increase in grade average is attributable to Omega's
professor-evaluation procedure, and that the end result is a perception on the part of
employers that Omega graduates are less qualified for jobs than Alpha graduates. To better
assess the argument I would need to analyze 15-year trends in (l) the percentage of Omega
students participating in the evaluation procedure, (2) Omega's admission standards and
quality of education, and (3) Omega's emphasis on job training and career preparation. I would
also need to know what other means are available to Omega for enabling its graduates to find
better jobs.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 2, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: About
about the number or percentage of Omega146 s...
^^^^^
Line 22, column 44, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...ally, even if the dean can substantiate all of the foregoing assumptions, the deans asser...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 22, column 82, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'deans'' or 'dean's'?
Suggestion: deans'; dean's
...e all of the foregoing assumptions, the deans assertion that Omega must terminate it...
^^^^^
Line 30, column 13, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'deans'' or 'dean's'?
Suggestion: deans'; dean's
...ecessarily be better ones. In sum, the deans argument is unpersuasive as it stands. ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, if, look, second, so, still, then, for example, in short, such as, as a result, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 55.5748502994 97% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 16.3942115768 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2642.0 2260.96107784 117% => OK
No of words: 471.0 441.139720559 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.6093418259 5.12650576532 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65859790218 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.21113877428 2.78398813304 115% => OK
Unique words: 213.0 204.123752495 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.452229299363 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 833.4 705.55239521 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59920159681 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 12.0 4.22255489022 284% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 70.3493506855 57.8364921388 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 155.411764706 119.503703932 130% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.7058823529 23.324526521 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.11764705882 5.70786347227 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 34.0 5.15768463074 659% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => 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: 0.227932066006 0.218282227539 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0935199594914 0.0743258471296 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0404196092753 0.0701772020484 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0704011659093 0.128457276422 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0464098884267 0.0628817314937 74% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.8 14.3799401198 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 27.15 48.3550499002 56% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.2 12.197005988 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.55 12.5979740519 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.73 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 112.0 98.500998004 114% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 12.3882235529 125% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.9071856287 134% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
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.