Groveton College has successfully reduced student cheating by adopting an honor code, which calls for
students to agree not to cheat in their academic endeavors and to notify a faculty member if they suspect
that others have cheated. Groveton's honor code replaced a system in which teachers closely monitored
students; under that system, teachers reported an average of thirty cases of cheating per year. In the first
year the honor code was in place, students reported twenty-one cases of cheating; five years later, this
figure had dropped to fourteen. Moreover, in a recent survey, a majority of Groveton students said that
they would be less likely to cheat with an honor code in place than without. Thus, all colleges and
universities should adopt honor codes similar to Groveton's in order to decrease cheating among students.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide
whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain
how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation
The memo argues that implementation of honor code to mitigate the amount of cheating by students to the lowest point should be ubiquitous among all schools. To endorse this thesis, three postulations have been proposed. 1) The predilection of students to cheat during the tests has been alleviated. 2) It is a kind of reliable evaluation for administrators and instructors to praise or censure the students who are more partial to cheat. 3) The susceptibility of carrying out cheat in ambiances subsuming this approach is minimal. Close scrutiny each of these facts, divulges none of them sound plausible.
A threshold problem with the statement involves reduction in the penchant of students after arrival of the honor code. In contrast, the writer underestimates the predominance of other elements in this fall. For instance, the spot in which the exams are hold may be equipped with cutting-edge and elaborated inspection tools and devices detecting and lodging each irregular movement of students during the test, therefore, this may deter students from cheating. To delineate, the role of diversified and sundry physical properties of academic environment and amenities to better and more severe inspection and surveillance cannot be abstruse for anyone. Furthermore, incrementing the level of knowledge of teacher to impart to the students and to contribute them to become more connoisseur and needed persons who do not require any cheating to elevate their scores are also remarkable.
Even assuming that the subsistence of only 30 cases to affirm the accuracy of this method cannot be tenable. Going into the depth, only when a plethora of items and data for any experiments are accumulated, can it be anticipated that the novel method can leave positive and privileges influences for other similar cases as well. Thus, based on this restrict information, it does not seem coherent to reach a conclusion that the efficiency of the honor code technique can be utilized for other academic places. Accordingly, who could deny the necessity of extending the case study to approve the yield and authenticity of honor code for other schools during long period of time?
Nor does the mere fact that extenuating the number of students inclined toward cheating can be determined as an effective reason and strategy to pursue the honor code approach. As a matter of the fact, the scrivener ignores the significance of total students studying during the three years. Since, the ambiguous number of students in executing during this analysis may lead the researcher to an adverse and detrimental repercussions remaining a myriad of negative and pitfalls both for students and for the teachers. In conclusion, the more the effective and vigorous parameters are transparent, the less the prevalence of blemishes and errors in adopting or repulsing this strategy will be observed. Rarely do a number of students remain constant during three years and it is one of alerting factor to opt for this method.
In sum the argument is logically flawed and therefore indefensible as it stands. To bolster the hypothesis, the author must insert more diverse and wide-range of cases beyond 30 items to aver the validation of the honor code technique. A well as, the number of students serves as a main culprit in rejecting or embracing this approach to be disseminated among other academic areas. Ultimately, the existence of wee-equipped and advanced technology to monitor the treatment of pupils during the exams cannot be eradicated.
(566 words)
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 529, Rule ID: CLOSE_SCRUTINY[1]
Message: Use simply 'scrutiny'.
Suggestion: Scrutiny
...ces subsuming this approach is minimal. Close scrutiny each of these facts, divulges none of t...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 662, Rule ID: PERIOD_OF_TIME[1]
Message: Use simply 'period'.
Suggestion: period
...onor code for other schools during long period of time? Nor does the mere fact that extenuati...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, but, furthermore, if, may, so, then, therefore, thus, well, for instance, in conclusion, in contrast, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 27.0 11.1786427146 242% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 87.0 55.5748502994 157% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2967.0 2260.96107784 131% => OK
No of words: 568.0 441.139720559 129% => OK
Chars per words: 5.2235915493 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.88187981987 4.56307096286 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.98166833124 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 301.0 204.123752495 147% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.529929577465 0.468620217663 113% => OK
syllable_count: 947.7 705.55239521 134% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.6398635742 57.8364921388 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.625 119.503703932 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6666666667 23.324526521 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.33333333333 5.70786347227 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.20758483034 171% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.195271239037 0.218282227539 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0559446427446 0.0743258471296 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0505921443492 0.0701772020484 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.117717264426 0.128457276422 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0300878382731 0.0628817314937 48% => 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: 15.0 14.3799401198 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 48.3550499002 82% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.81 8.32208582834 118% => OK
difficult_words: 181.0 98.500998004 184% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.