The president of Grove College suggests that the college relinquish its century-old tradition of all-female education and accept male students as well. The director of the alumnae opposes this plan providing two surveys about the student's opinion of its all-female tradition. To decide whether the suggestion would work or not, there are three questions need to be answered first.
First, the president takes the example of other all-female colleges which were successful at significantly increasing the number of the admissions. However, the question is if the change to coeducation might not bring the same consequence for the Grove College. It is likely that unlike the other regions of once all-female colleges, the region where the Grove College is located has many colleges comparable to Grove College that even though it starts to admit the male students, there might not be a significant increase in the applications. Or the region has a very conservative culture which prefers single-sex colleges. When there is no similarity between other all-female colleges and Grove Collge, the comparison might become a hasty generalization. Thus, the author should provide the similar characteristics between Grove College and other all-female colleges.
The second important question is whether the survey of incoming students is providing meaningful information. The director assumes that applicants will not choose Grove College when it moves to coeducation. However, it might not necessarily true. It is unknown when the survey was conducted. If the annual surveys were from decades ago, it might not represent the current upcoming students. Therefore, the author should provide information related to the year of the survey on upcoming students.
The third question is whether the survey was valid enough to correctly represent the opinions of students. It is possible that the survey question was biased or misleading. For instance, if the survey asked how they would feel about not being accepted due to the admission of male students, they are highly likely to respond in a negative way. Therefore, to strengthen its argument, the director of the alumnae should consider whether the survey was conducted in an unbiased way.
To sum up, those aforementioned questions need to be answered prior to the decision of moving to the coeducation system. If not, the decision whether to change or not to change, might bring the unexpected harms to Grove College.
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- not OK
argument 3 -- not OK
-------------------
You understand the topic wrongly. The arguments should be from the director, who opposes the plan. and give 3 reasons:
1. Arguing that all-female education is essential to the very identity of the college,
2. 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.
3.The director also points to a survey of Grove alumnae in which a majority of respondents strongly favored keeping the college all female.
----------------------
another issue of the essay is that you put doubts on the survey, however, in GMAT, we have to accept all data or evidence are true. It is important to find out loopholes behind surveys or studies. Loopholes mean that we accept all surveys told are true, but there are some conditions applied, for example:
It works for time A (10 years ago), but it doesn't mean it works for time B (nowadays).
It works for location A (a city, community, nation), but it doesn't mean it works for location B (another city, community, nation).
It works for people A (a manager), but it doesn't mean it works for people B (a worker).
It works for event A (one event, project... ), but it doesn't mean it works for event B (another event, project...).
It works for A and B, but not C.
...
take example from the argument 2, we can say, it works for incoming students, but it doesn't mean it works for in-school students.
----------------------
You may re-write the essay.
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 387 350
No. of Characters: 2032 1500
No. of Different Words: 181 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.435 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.251 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.808 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 163 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 128 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 91 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 54 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.429 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.203 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.318 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.541 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.076 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 232, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'students'' or 'student's'?
Suggestion: students'; student's
...is plan providing two surveys about the students opinion of its all-female tradition. To...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 326, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a negative way" with adverb for "negative"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...ents, they are highly likely to respond in a negative way. Therefore, to strengthen its argument,...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 461, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an unbiased way" with adverb for "unbiased"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...nsider whether the survey was conducted in an unbiased way. To sum up, those aforementioned que...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, second, so, then, therefore, third, thus, well, for instance, to sum up
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 : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 28.8173652695 66% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 55.5748502994 76% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2085.0 2260.96107784 92% => OK
No of words: 387.0 441.139720559 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.38759689922 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.43534841618 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88343843837 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 204.123752495 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.472868217054 0.468620217663 101% => OK
syllable_count: 649.8 705.55239521 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 48.430093154 57.8364921388 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.2857142857 119.503703932 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.4285714286 23.324526521 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.33333333333 5.70786347227 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.67664670659 235% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.312487459876 0.218282227539 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0916221904323 0.0743258471296 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.135538988299 0.0701772020484 193% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.15692511463 0.128457276422 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.157633325843 0.0628817314937 251% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 48.3550499002 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.98 12.5979740519 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.36 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 98.500998004 95% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.