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 educa

Essay topics:

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."

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 keep the tradition of all female students policy, because it could improve morale among students and guarantee final advantages from alumnae. To support his/her claims, the author disprove the approval of coeducation from majority of teaching faculty and cites/quotes students and alumnae's survey results. Quite reasonable 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 would 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 fact that coeducation is actually absurd for Grove College to increase students' application, a question that is not yet answered. It is likely that such proposal could actually increase college's recruitment and improve financial status, because times have been changed and coeducation become a common requirement from students to facilitate communication between male and female. Without additional information to evaluate such probability, it is possible that adaption to teaching faculty's suggestion could actually help further reach president's original goal. Such phenomenon could seriously challenge president's refusal for coeduation and render his/her claim much less advisable. On the contrary, any valid proof that coeducation actually breach the common requirement from students could strengthen his/her viewpoint.

Granted that coeducation isn't common from students and given the fact that result of students and alumnae's survey support traditional policy, whether to stick to all-female stragegy needs a second look. Behind the author's reasoning lie two critical implications. The first one is that result of students' survey is trustable. The probability that limited responders and incorrect data collecting method disturb the rightness of the student's survey must be considered and addressed. Yet, if the author could unequivocally demonstrate that responders represents the typical potential students group of college and data collection process is mainly reasonable, his/her reasoning will gain more weights.

Furthermore, the second implication is that alumnae's overall attitude is to oppose such coeducation. While the author shows that half of alumnae are strongly against coeduation, the probability that they are myopic and just not accustomed to change of tradition without any wise reason behind could not be excluded in advance. For example, as they had graduated from all-female university, they are blind to believe that such policy keep right and even don't consider the wholesome result brought about by the change. Thus, we have no clues whether it is just reasonable to follow their ideas. If no, to sticking to all-females strategy is unlikely to take better effect than changes. Otherwise, adherence to original policy could be expected worthwhile.

Last but not least, while we can acknowledge for all mentioned positions are reasonable, it remains to be seen whether such old tradition could guarantee school's goal for improving morale and financial supports. Other factors, such as additional resource requirements from financial perspective and new student's morality level, could seriously impact both improved morale level and financial supports. If both of these can't be guaranteed, this is doubtful that sticking to such policy could guarantee to fit for the goal.

In summary, while several cases support the continuation of the all-female tradition, this is a conclusion that we cannot derive from the information available in the passage. Furthermore, even if coeducations' imfeasibility and strong supports from students, alumnae and consideration out of finanical and morale, being loyal to the old tradition is still built upon implications, which are open to different probabilities. Only after the aforementioned questions are adequately addressed can we effectively evaluate such recommendation and reach a logically sound conclusion.

Votes
Average: 6.9 (3 votes)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 76, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'students'' or 'student's'?
Suggestion: students'; student's
...nds to keep the tradition of all female students policy, because it could improve morale...
^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 528, 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 would end up being pretty co...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 26, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...iewpoint. Granted that coeducation isnt common from students and given the fact...
^^^^
Line 9, column 188, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...er to stick to all-female stragegy needs a second look. Behind the authors reason...
^^
Line 13, column 340, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...not be excluded in advance. For example, as they had graduated from all-female un...
^^
Line 13, column 455, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...ve that such policy keep right and even dont consider the wholesome result brought a...
^^^^
Line 17, column 304, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'students'' or 'student's'?
Suggestion: students'; student's
...ents from financial perspective and new students morality level, could seriously impact ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 17, column 420, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...nd financial supports. If both of these cant be guaranteed, this is doubtful that st...
^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, furthermore, if, look, regarding, second, so, still, then, thus, while, for example, in summary, such as, on the contrary

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.6327345309 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 24.0 11.1786427146 215% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 44.0 28.8173652695 153% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 68.0 55.5748502994 122% => OK
Nominalization: 31.0 16.3942115768 189% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3509.0 2260.96107784 155% => OK
No of words: 603.0 441.139720559 137% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.8192371476 5.12650576532 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.9554069778 4.56307096286 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97779469766 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 316.0 204.123752495 155% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.524046434494 0.468620217663 112% => OK
syllable_count: 1075.5 705.55239521 152% => 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: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 10.0 2.70958083832 369% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.22255489022 189% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 19.7664670659 132% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.2532094974 57.8364921388 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.961538462 119.503703932 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.1923076923 23.324526521 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.5 5.70786347227 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 5.25449101796 152% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 19.0 8.20758483034 231% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => 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: 0.100720804731 0.218282227539 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0283826978479 0.0743258471296 38% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0273592602644 0.0701772020484 39% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0555650066441 0.128457276422 43% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0172210945122 0.0628817314937 27% => 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: 17.6 14.3799401198 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 48.3550499002 65% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.197005988 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.77 12.5979740519 133% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.54 8.32208582834 115% => OK
difficult_words: 182.0 98.500998004 185% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.

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.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 26 15
No. of Words: 611 350
No. of Characters: 3430 1500
No. of Different Words: 310 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.972 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.614 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.924 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 282 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 225 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 177 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 121 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.5 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.205 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.731 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.28 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.515 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.136 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5