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 coeducation, 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 this passage, the author recommends to maintain Grove College's all-female education, because of improvement of morality among students and favour for alumnae. To support his/her claim, the author cites a comparison for faculty's opposite attitude to such policy and student's enthusiastic support for it. Furthermore, it is also said that more than half of alumnae endorse the old tradition of all-female college. Quite convincing though such recommendation appears at first glance, there exists several questions regarding his/her lines of reasoning that requires further analysis. Thus, the author's conclusion could end up being pretty compelling or invalid in the end, depending on the answers to the questions.
To start off, the author's reasoning heavily relies on the validity of faculty's suggestion for supporting coeducation, a question that is not yet answered. However, it is likely that coeducation is more beneficial than all-female style because it could really enhance the recruitment status and support the author's goal of both improvement of morale and support from alumnae. Without additional information, it is possible that coeducation could attract more applicants and students with different genders could actually help improve morale and break the traditional bias of gender isolation. Such phenomenon could seriously challenge invalidity about faculty's recommendation and render the author's recommendation much less advisable. On the contrary, any valid proof that coeducation could inversely decrease applicant's number could strengthen his/her conclusion.
Granted that faculty's invalid idea and given the fact that both students and majority of alumnae support the traditional all-female policy, whether we should persist with single gender education needs a second look. Behind the author's reasoning lie two critical implications. The first one is that current students' tendency could also represent new applicants' attitude who would become students in Grove College. However, the probability that new applicants that grows in a gender-equal society could prefer to coeducation circumstance must be considered and addressed. Yet, if the author could sufficiently demonstrate that the incoming new students are actually fond of a pure all-female environment, his/her conclusion will gain more weights.
Furthermore, the second implication is that the survey constructed for alumnae reflects the truth of their preference. While it is shown in the survey that majority of graduates from the college are still enamored with the tradition, the probability that such survey is designed in bias for the sake of drawing support to continue with old fashion policy could not be excluded in advance. For example, the designer of such survey is a crazy fan for all-female policy or she/he had too much worry about a unnecessary outgrowth of change. Thus, we have no clues whether the survey's result is an actual reflection for alumnae's authentic idea. If no, their census of old fashion is unlikely to become reasonable. Otherwise, we are inclined to believe that it is still worth to persist such policy.
In summary, while faculty's suggestion has been disputed as invalid, this is a conclusion that we can not derive from the information available in the passage. Furthermore, even if strong support from students and alumnae, persisting old fashion is still built upon implications, which are open to different probabilities. Only after these aforementioned questions are adequately addressed can we efficiently evaluate the author's argument and reach a logically sound conclusion.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 24 15
No. of Words: 548 350
No. of Characters: 3015 1500
No. of Different Words: 272 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.838 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.502 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.948 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 241 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 200 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 148 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 103 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.833 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.814 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.75 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.297 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.498 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.136 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 29, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'recommends maintaining'.
Suggestion: recommends maintaining
In this passage, the author recommends to maintain Grove Colleges all-female education, be...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 595, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...at requires further analysis. Thus, the authors conclusion could end up being pretty co...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 307, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... the recruitment status and support the authors goal of both improvement of morale and...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 322, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t status and support the authors goal of both improvement of morale and support f...
^^
Line 5, column 692, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... facultys recommendation and render the authors recommendation much less advisable. On ...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 201, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rsist with single gender education needs a second look. Behind the authors reason...
^^
Line 9, column 308, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'students'' or 'student's'?
Suggestion: students'; student's
...ications. The first one is that current students tendency could also represent new appli...
^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 351, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'applicants'' or 'applicant's'?
Suggestion: applicants'; applicant's
...dents tendency could also represent new applicants attitude who would become students in G...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 503, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...licy or she/he had too much worry about a unnecessary outgrowth of change. Thus, ...
^
Line 17, column 76, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...on has been disputed as invalid, this is a conclusion that we can not derive from...
^^
Line 17, column 423, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...dressed can we efficiently evaluate the authors argument and reach a logically sound co...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, first, furthermore, however, if, look, really, regarding, second, so, still, then, thus, while, as for, for example, in summary, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 13.6137724551 140% => OK
Pronoun: 44.0 28.8173652695 153% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 60.0 55.5748502994 108% => OK
Nominalization: 29.0 16.3942115768 177% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3082.0 2260.96107784 136% => OK
No of words: 543.0 441.139720559 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.6758747698 5.12650576532 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.82725184711 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99450345319 2.78398813304 108% => OK
Unique words: 278.0 204.123752495 136% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.51197053407 0.468620217663 109% => OK
syllable_count: 959.4 705.55239521 136% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59920159681 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.22255489022 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.7462731239 57.8364921388 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.416666667 119.503703932 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.625 23.324526521 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.66666666667 5.70786347227 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 11.0 5.25449101796 209% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 8.20758483034 195% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0581307779044 0.218282227539 27% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0186719340705 0.0743258471296 25% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.029613527499 0.0701772020484 42% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.034899709515 0.128457276422 27% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0258381498422 0.0628817314937 41% => 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: 16.6 14.3799401198 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 48.3550499002 67% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.96 12.5979740519 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.15 8.32208582834 110% => OK
difficult_words: 152.0 98.500998004 154% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.