The following is an excerpt from a speech given to the School Board about a change to the curriculum:
"Because the future will be dominated by technology, we must make four years of computer programming mandatory for all high school students. If our students take these classes, they’ll all be able to get high-paying programming jobs and lead fulfilling lives because software engineers and data scientists have the best job prospects and salaries. Therefore, we must educate our students so they can secure these kinds of jobs. Even if they pursue other careers, programming will still benefit them, given that all industries are becoming more technological."
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 author draws out that students pursuing other careers will also benefit by programming given that all industries are becoming more technological. This conclusion is predicated on flawed assumptions and insufficiently supported. In order to evaluate the author's remark on his observation, more evidence is required.
The author begins by mentioning that future will be dominated by technology, and making 4 year computer programming must for the high school students. The author is making a falsely assuming computer programming to be the sole technology that is dominating the world and the future. However, there is no evidence provided by the author that supports this claim. If the author provides data on the number of industries belonging to different domains such as mechanical, aeronautical, cosmetics etc. having implemented programming technology and also promulgating this approach of problem solving in their respective domains would support as an evidence for his claim. Therefore, without having clear data and supporting evidence, the author's claim cannot be properly evaluated.
Moreover, if students take programming classes, they'll be able to get high-paying programming jobs and lead fulfilling lives because software engineers and data scientists have the best job prospects and salaries is also predicated on false assumptions. However, not all students would want programming jobs for their interest may lie in different domain which would also lead to high paying job. The author assumes that prospects of data scientist and software engineer has best salaries. There is no evidence as to what salary on an average a data scientist makes per year. If at all they make more, is it relevant to suggest that all students taking classes on computer programming will be better equipped themselves with knowledge to get these high paid jobs? Also, if programming jobs are not highly paid compared to other mechanical jobs then it would not be feasible to mandate programming classes on the high schools students. Therefore, with lacking fundamental aspects and insufficient evidence, the author's claim is not valid to evaluate.
Additionally, the author also states that, students pursuing other careers can also benefit with the programming classes. However, there is no evidence provided by the author on what basis he assumes this statement to be true. If the other domains such as mechanical or aerospace industries were using programming concepts in managing, storing and regulating data and also to run their organizations by providing client based services using programming knowledge, then such an evidence would act as a support, if not otherwise, for the author's argument that programming indeed helps in other careers as well. Therefore, without having supporting evidences the author's claim in invalid and cannot be evaluated thoroughly.
While, the author's thought on implementing computer programming classes for the benefit of the student is laudable, but the supporting evidences required to draw the conclusion is insufficient. Therefore, with the evidences as discussed, it is possible to evaluate.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 7 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 482 350
No. of Characters: 2613 1500
No. of Different Words: 206 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.686 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.421 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.916 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 206 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 175 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 138 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 81 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.952 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.826 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.762 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.359 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.538 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.101 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 49, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: they'll
..., if students take programming classes, theyll be able to get high-paying programming ...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 472, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[4]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'has the best'.
Suggestion: has the best
...of data scientist and software engineer has best salaries. There is no evidence as to wh...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 537, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...as a support, if not otherwise, for the authors argument that programming indeed helps ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, may, moreover, so, then, therefore, well, while, as to, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 55.5748502994 86% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2668.0 2260.96107784 118% => OK
No of words: 481.0 441.139720559 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.54677754678 5.12650576532 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68313059816 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.00109549027 2.78398813304 108% => OK
Unique words: 223.0 204.123752495 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.463617463617 0.468620217663 99% => OK
syllable_count: 816.3 705.55239521 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 68.1793484401 57.8364921388 118% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.272727273 119.503703932 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8636363636 23.324526521 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.95454545455 5.70786347227 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.20758483034 171% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => 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: 0.233326749634 0.218282227539 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0786319795204 0.0743258471296 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0884422975707 0.0701772020484 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.135728103147 0.128457276422 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0586811783067 0.0628817314937 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.6 14.3799401198 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 48.3550499002 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.91 12.5979740519 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.58 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 119.0 98.500998004 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.