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 80 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.
Keeping the college all female will improve morale among students and convince alumnae to keep supporting the college financially."
The president and administrative staff of Grove College - a private institution, urges the college's governing committee that the college should follow its age old
culture of admitting only female students and must oppose coeducation. The president and administrative staff came to this conclusion because they think it would
encourage more female students to apply to the college and also 80% of the learners who participated in a survey opposed coeducation, even though faculty members
were in support of coeducation. Furthermore, in an another survey 50% of students opposed coeducation, which made the author of the argument stick to his recommendation.
In order to properly evaluate the argument, the following unstated assumptions must be considered.
To begin, most of the teachers were supporting coeducation saying that it may result in increse of admission but the author ignored their view as 80% of students who
participated in a survey opposed coeducation. Sometimes, a student may not know what is best for and in such cases a faculty should decide what to do even if it goes
against the wish of the student. Faculty, usually stay in a college longer than students and they may know more than pupils when it comes to matters like this. It can
be the case that they promote coeducation because students get to meet different genders and interacting with each other may help reinforce the students's communication
skills. Also, the students may be habituated to all-women classrooms and may find it hard to adjust to coeducation even though coeducation may benifit the female students.
Therefore, instead of relying on surveys, students and teachers should meet and talk about this issue to understand each others view and then they can decide to take a
step that benfits both teacher and faculty.
Even if we ignore lecturer views, a suvey conducted in the college among students suggest that 80% opposed coeducation. The author fails to mention basic statistics like strength of the college
and number of people participiated in the survey. Perhaps, most of the students were absent on the day the survey was conducted due to some reasons and the minority of
students who took part in the survey opposed coeducation. In such case, the survey deos not represent the student body and onlu shows a biased result. Furthermore, the
author of the argument also did not provide the questions asked in the survey and the way survey was conducted. It can the case that the questions in the survey are hard
to understand or student government - who conducted the survey, failed to properly explain the procedure of survey. The author failed to consider the above unstated assumptions
that weakens the argument.
Aditionally, alumne of the college took place in another survey and over half of the participents opposed coeducation. Firstly, it would be inappropriate to take a survey
from past students of the college on current issue because time have changed and the situaton may also have changed. Just like it would be unwise to apply 10 year old
solution to a new problem, previous students may not be aware of the present scenrio and they cannot properly judge and respond.
In conclusion, the argument as it's present is flawed due to its reliance on several unwarranted assumptions and unanswered questions. If the author is able to present
proof or evidence in a systematic manner, it may be possible to judge if Grove college should adopt or oppose coeducation.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 8 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 16 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 572 350
No. of Characters: 2848 1500
No. of Different Words: 249 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.89 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.979 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.763 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 222 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 168 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 105 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 67 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.862 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.636 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.349 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.55 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.123 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 49, Rule ID: AN_ANOTHER[1]
Message: One of these determiners is redundant in this context. Choose only one: 'a survey' or 'another survey'.
Suggestion: a survey; another survey
...support of coeducation. Furthermore, in an another survey 50% of students opposed coeducation, wh...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 167, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...en it comes to matters like this. It can be the case that they promote coeducatio...
^^^
Line 12, column 168, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... view and then they can decide to take a step that benfits both teacher and facul...
^^^
Line 27, column 19, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a systematic manner" with adverb for "systematic"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...r is able to present proof or evidence in a systematic manner, it may be possible to judge if Grove c...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, furthermore, if, may, so, then, therefore, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 23.0 12.9520958084 178% => OK
Conjunction : 25.0 11.1786427146 224% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 28.8173652695 108% => OK
Preposition: 78.0 55.5748502994 140% => OK
Nominalization: 26.0 16.3942115768 159% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2946.0 2260.96107784 130% => OK
No of words: 572.0 441.139720559 130% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15034965035 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.89045207381 4.56307096286 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85997140518 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 258.0 204.123752495 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.451048951049 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 911.7 705.55239521 129% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.22255489022 213% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.7128982683 57.8364921388 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.909090909 119.503703932 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.0 23.324526521 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.77272727273 5.70786347227 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 23.0 5.15768463074 446% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
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: 0.16221210903 0.218282227539 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0573445398322 0.0743258471296 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0947635381448 0.0701772020484 135% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0577158942375 0.128457276422 45% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.109682734224 0.0628817314937 174% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.8 14.3799401198 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 48.3550499002 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.89 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.4 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 126.0 98.500998004 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 20.0 12.3882235529 161% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.