Recently the Classen University students presented that Classen University has a low post-college employment rate as compared to top-ranked schools due to burdensome breadth requirements. The students of this petition reached a conclusion that the University should cut back on its breadth requirements for free time to take advance courses related to the student's field. Regarding this the students present evidence to support the validity of their conclusion; however, the weak evidence is based on aimless comparisons, unjustified assumptions and weak evidence hence making it difficult to go forward with the presented conclusion.
In the petition the students compare the post-employment rates of Classen with top ranked schools. Is this a fair comparison? There might be multitude of factors which separate top-ranked schools from Classen University. For this unjustified comparison to have merit it must face many questions. These include: "Are the student admission rates for Classen and top schools the same?", "Whether the entrance difficulty of for Classen is the same as top ranked schools?" or "Does the problem lie with students?".
As well as aimless comparisons the author presents weak evidence, which does not show that post-employment rate are lower due to lack of freedom to take advance courses in respective student's specialized field. The students assume that because their schedule does not contain advance courses in their fields, they are not getting employment. However, a question that must be asked is whether students who are not getting employed are qualifiable for the job or have internship experience? It could be that most students at Classen are lacking the real-world experience through internships and hence are being rejected the job opportunities.
Similar to the aforementioned argument flaws, another unjustified assumption that the students state is that Classen students would be more attractive to employers if they were to take advance courses. The students present no statistic or experimented proof that students with the advance courses are more likely to get the job over students who took the breadth courses. The authors need to answer the question "Are more students with advance courses facing less challenges to get a job?" to be able to fully support their argument that students with advance courses are more attractive to employers.
Despite the unjustified assumptions, and weak correlations; if sufficient evidence is presented then student’s conclusion might have some merit. If the student body were to show statistically that employers prefer students with advance courses over breadth courses or that Classen is comparable to top-ranked schools in terms of admission difficulty, ranking and fees then only the presented conclusion can gain some integrity to have some merit.
Till the students present aimless correlations, unjustified assumptions, and weak evidence it will stay difficult to proceed with their proposed conclusion. Thus, to proceed with the suggested conclusion more and stronger evidence is required by the student body.
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 10 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 6 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 473 350
No. of Characters: 2582 1500
No. of Different Words: 199 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.664 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.459 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.898 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 202 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 191 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 118 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 76 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.895 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.269 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.421 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.355 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.619 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.111 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 465, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun challenges is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...re students with advance courses facing less challenges to get a job?' to be ab...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
hence, however, if, regarding, so, then, thus, well, as to, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 28.8173652695 101% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 55.5748502994 97% => OK
Nominalization: 29.0 16.3942115768 177% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2688.0 2260.96107784 119% => OK
No of words: 473.0 441.139720559 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.68287526427 5.12650576532 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.66353547975 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08405866212 2.78398813304 111% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 204.123752495 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.448202959831 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 803.7 705.55239521 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 67.4490471483 57.8364921388 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 141.473684211 119.503703932 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.8947368421 23.324526521 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.68421052632 5.70786347227 65% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => 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: 0.319398882256 0.218282227539 146% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.120616962594 0.0743258471296 162% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0878223717663 0.0701772020484 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.182550476122 0.128457276422 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0722044373141 0.0628817314937 115% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.8 14.3799401198 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.3550499002 80% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.96 12.5979740519 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.43 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 98.500998004 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 12.3882235529 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.