The president of Grove College has recommended that the college abandon its century-old tradition of all-female education and begin admitting men. Pointing to other all-female colleges that experienced an increase in applications after adopting coeducation, the president argues that coeducation would lead to a significant increase in applications and enrollment. However, the director of the alumnae association opposes the plan. Arguing that all-female education is essential to the very identity of the college, the director cites annual surveys of incoming students in which these students say that the school’s all-female status was the primary reason they selected Grove. The director also points to a survey of Grove alumnae in which a majority of respondents strongly favored keeping the college all female.
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 president of Grove College proposes that coeducation should be adopted to attract applications and increase enrollment, citing the fact that other all-female colleges which started admitting men have an increase in applications. However, the director of the alumnae association objects the plan, arguing that the majority of students and alumnae hold that all-female tradition should be reserved, supported by two surveys results. Though at first glance both of them seem quite convincing, close scrutiny reveals flaws in their arguments.
At the first place, the president attributes the increase of applicants in other all-female colleges to the adoption of coeducation while no evidence is given to support this. It is entirely possible that other factors, such as improved campus infrastructures, higher education quality etcetera contribute to the increase of applicants. Even if the increase is resulted from the provision of coeducation, there is no assurance that Grove College will get the same results as those colleges. After all, there could be many differences among colleges and these differences could significantly influence the impact on Grove College of admitting men. Therefore, the true reasons why increase of applicants was witnessed in other colleges, differences between Grove College and those colleges and how these differences will impact Grove’s adopting coeducation should be considered.
In terms of the director of alumnae association, his argument is based on dubious survey results. The first survey appears to indicate that incoming students all apply to Grove College for its all-female status. However, the number of subjects is unclear. If only a few incoming students were asked, then this result could not represent all the newcomers. Even if a sufficient number of them were interviewed, the result is still not representative because other students’ opinions were ignored.
The result of the second survey -- “a majority of respondents strongly favored keeping the college all-female” is not persuasive as well. Firstly, the phrase “a majority of” is equivocal. Consider if there are only three respondents, then two would be the majority. Secondly, a majority of respondents does not necessarily equals to a majority of alumnae. Perhaps many of the alumnae who are in favor of coeducation did not respond. Therefore, the sample size, methods, and quantified results of the surveys should be provided.
Lastly, even if it is true that most students and alumnae prefer the all-female tradition, there could be other ways to help reserve it. For instance, Grove College could limit the number of males admitted, provide special courses for females and the like. Ruling out men’s admission is not necessarily the only way to preserve its identity of all-female education.
In conclusion, statements of both the president and the director are untenable and more investigation is needed to determine whether coeducation would be beneficial to Grove College. There are also other means it could take to increase its applications and enrollment.
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: 475 350
No. of Characters: 2545 1500
No. of Different Words: 223 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.668 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.358 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.858 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 202 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 173 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 122 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 70 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.792 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.91 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.833 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.295 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.544 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.088 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 495, Rule ID: CLOSE_SCRUTINY[1]
Message: Use simply 'scrutiny'.
Suggestion: scrutiny
...nce both of them seem quite convincing, close scrutiny reveals flaws in their arguments. At...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 344, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[3]
Message: The verb 'does' requires base form of the verb: 'equal'
Suggestion: equal
...ity of respondents does not necessarily equals to a majority of alumnae. Perhaps many ...
^^^^^^
Line 11, column 184, Rule ID: ALSO_OTHER[1]
Message: Use simply 'there are other' or 'there are also'
Suggestion: There are other; There are also
...n would be beneficial to Grove College. There are also other means it could take to increase its app...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, lastly, second, secondly, so, still, then, therefore, well, while, after all, for instance, in conclusion, such as, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.6327345309 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 55.5748502994 99% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2660.0 2260.96107784 118% => OK
No of words: 475.0 441.139720559 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.6 5.12650576532 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.66845742379 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0223813806 2.78398813304 109% => OK
Unique words: 237.0 204.123752495 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.498947368421 0.468620217663 106% => OK
syllable_count: 846.9 705.55239521 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59920159681 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 50.0593397879 57.8364921388 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.833333333 119.503703932 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7916666667 23.324526521 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.91666666667 5.70786347227 121% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.397254464775 0.218282227539 182% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.107766105694 0.0743258471296 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.11689587285 0.0701772020484 167% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.209219006706 0.128457276422 163% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.110232803914 0.0628817314937 175% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 14.3799401198 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.27 48.3550499002 73% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.2 12.5979740519 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.23 8.32208582834 111% => OK
difficult_words: 140.0 98.500998004 142% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 12.3882235529 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.