The following recommendation was made by the president and administrative staff of Grove College, a private institution, to the college’s governing committee.
“We recommend that Grove College preserve its century-old tradition of all-female education rather than admit men into its programs. It is true that a majority of faculty members voted in favor of coeducation, arguing that it would encourage more students to apply to Grove. But eighty percent of the students responding to a survey conducted by the student government wanted the school to remain all female, and over half of the alumni who answered a separate survey also opposed coeducation. Keeping the college all-female, therefore, will improve morale among students and convince alumni to keep supporting the college financially.”
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The recommendation made by the president and administrative staff of Grove College to the governing committee presents a view to keep the tradition of all-female education. It says that the committee should ignore the view held by majority of faculty members of admitting men into the college and should favor the students who oppose it. It is in the interest of the college to remain all-female because it will improve the morale amongst students. Moreover, this decision will keep the alumni happy and secure the funds coming from the alumni.
The recommendation however is made in a narrow perspective. The recommendation gives importance to the survey where eighty present of students are in favor of all-female education and ignores the view held by the members of the faculty. It should, however, be noted that students remain in the college for shorter periods of time and it is the faculty members who stay longer in the college. They are more interested in the betterment of the college than the students. The faculty members have more understanding of the college and their suggestions are more practical. It is in the interest of the college as a whole to admit males in its programs. On the other hand, the students view the interest of the college for as long as they are in it. It is not practical to rely on the suggestion of students since it is short-termed and one-sided. It favors only the students and not the college.
The students’ favoring all-female education can be because of many reasons. It is likely that they would not like to have any change in it for the fear of their adjustment in the college. The problems of students can be known only when the matter is talked and they are able to convey their feelings. A survey will not reflect the inside feelings of students. Instead of following their suggestion blindly, it is better to look into the matter and resolve the problems they would have with co-education. By removing the fear of students, the administration committee would make a wise decision and follow the middle path. However, the recommendation does not give any such logical suggestions.
The argument also mentions that more than half of the alumni opposed coeducation. Going by what the alumni wants is not completely wise since they have attended the college in completely different times and it cannot be compared to the present. Views held in the past cannot be implemented to the needs of the present. Moreover, the college should work upon improving the quality of education and keep the alumni convinced of its work to keep supporting it. Quality work by college would generate funds even if they have to take a decision against the alumni.
Lastly, it is not wise to depend upon surveys to make such decisions. Surveys are conducted on a section of the total number of candidates. They may not take into consideration the whole strength of the college, the faculty members or the alumni. In that case, the results of surveys can be extremely misleading. It is possible that the result of the survey is contrary to the actual view held at large that favors coeducation. It would, therefore, be incorrect to form important decisions based on such surveys. In the light of the above discussion, the recommendation does not present a logical and thoughtful statement and the committee should consider other options as well.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 32 15
No. of Words: 574 350
No. of Characters: 2750 1500
No. of Different Words: 219 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.895 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.791 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.708 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 200 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 156 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 99 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 61 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.938 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.184 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.406 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.289 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.462 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.08 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, lastly, look, may, moreover, so, therefore, well, on the whole, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.9520958084 147% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 11.1786427146 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 41.0 28.8173652695 142% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 87.0 55.5748502994 157% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 16.3942115768 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2815.0 2260.96107784 125% => OK
No of words: 574.0 441.139720559 130% => OK
Chars per words: 4.90418118467 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.89472135074 4.56307096286 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80312722641 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 226.0 204.123752495 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.393728222997 0.468620217663 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 896.4 705.55239521 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 14.0 4.96107784431 282% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 15.0 8.76447105788 171% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 32.0 19.7664670659 162% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.5238444162 57.8364921388 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 87.96875 119.503703932 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.9375 23.324526521 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.125 5.70786347227 55% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 8.20758483034 195% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0468214294587 0.218282227539 21% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0137055891548 0.0743258471296 18% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0200256940002 0.0701772020484 29% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0281334623188 0.128457276422 22% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0180102840037 0.0628817314937 29% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.6 14.3799401198 74% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.3550499002 112% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.84 12.5979740519 86% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.62 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 98.500998004 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.