The following recommendation was made by the president and administrative staff of Grove College, a private institution, to the college's governing committee.
"Recently, there have been discussions about ending Grove College's century-old tradition of all-female education by admitting male students into our programs. At a recent faculty meeting, a majority of faculty members voted in favor of co-education, arguing that it would encourage more students to apply to Grove. However, Grove students, both past and present, are against the idea of coeducation. 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 alumnae who answered a separate survey also opposed coeducation. Therefore, we recommend maintaining Grove College's tradition of all-female education. We predict that keeping the college all-female will improve morale among students and convince alumnae to keep supporting the college financially."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
In the recommendation, it is given that the faculty and administration staff want to remove the century-old tradition of the Grove institution of all-female education by admitting male students into the programs. But the survey conducted by the student government states that 80 percent of the students do not want coeducation. Moreover, the same questions were asked from the alumnae, and half of them who replied were in favor of the decision of the student government. Hence, the administrative staff eradicated the thought of coeducation as it will boost the morale of the current studying students. Although the information provided concerns both of the faculty and student mindset, there are certain data which can not be considered as true and assumptions can be made. Therefore, such assumptions are presented in the essay.
Firstly, the information provided in the argument statement states that a survey was considered by the student government. There is no information regarding how many students from the institution filled the form and also at what time of the year the survey was conducted. If it might have been done during vacation times, it is a possibility that less number of students filled the form. Moreover, what if hardly ten students filled the form? Then, any conclusion can not be made from the result of the survey. Hence due to the absence of elucidity in the information about how many students filled the form, any conclusion can not be drawn.
Secondly, the statements also talks about the answers given by the alumni. There is also no information that provided adequate data about them. What was the graduating year of the alumni? and How many alumni were called and the number of alumni who responded? By only stating that fifty percent of the alumni do not support coeducation would definitely not give any proper conclusion to the statement.
Thirdly, as the suggestions regarding coeducation were asked from the faculty members also, the statement states that the majority were in support. Again, the author has failed to identify how many faculty members the questions were asked. Were all of the departmental faculty included or only suggestions were asked from a handful of them? Henceforth, due to the dearth of numeric information provided by the author, it is difficult to determine whether the results obtained from both of the sides of faculty and students should be considered as true or not.
Lastly, I would say that information provided by the author might be considered as a true but clear conclusion can not be drawn from the argument. If there had been pellucidity regarding the numbers of faculty, students participated for the suggestion then the conclusion would have been drawn.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 448 350
No. of Characters: 2241 1500
No. of Different Words: 180 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.601 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.002 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.795 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 158 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 126 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 93 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 63 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.364 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.126 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.682 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.335 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.549 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.156 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 512, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
... be made from the result of the survey. Hence due to the absence of elucidity in the ...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 189, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: And
... was the graduating year of the alumni? and How many alumni were called and the num...
^^^
Line 7, column 246, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
... members the questions were asked. Were all of the departmental faculty included or only s...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, if, lastly, moreover, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, third, thirdly, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.6327345309 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 28.8173652695 59% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 55.5748502994 103% => OK
Nominalization: 28.0 16.3942115768 171% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2299.0 2260.96107784 102% => OK
No of words: 448.0 441.139720559 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13169642857 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.60065326758 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86639736548 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 204.123752495 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.435267857143 0.468620217663 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 718.2 705.55239521 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 46.8607719427 57.8364921388 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.9565217391 119.503703932 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4782608696 23.324526521 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.60869565217 5.70786347227 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0862772474632 0.218282227539 40% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0290103574968 0.0743258471296 39% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0432027919528 0.0701772020484 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0499590661504 0.128457276422 39% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0363976741857 0.0628817314937 58% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 14.3799401198 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.3550499002 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.03 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 98.500998004 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.