Recently, there have been discussions about ending Grove College's century-old tradition of all-female education by admitting male students into our programs. At a recent faculty meeting, a majority of faculty members voted in favor of coeducation, arguing that it would encourage more students to apply to Grove. However, Grove students, both past and present, are against the idea of coeducation. Eighty 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. Therefore, we recommend maintaining Grove College's tradition of all-female education. We predict that keeping the college all-female will improve morale among students and convince alumnae to keep supporting the college financially.
The argument states that the Grove College should maintain its old tradition regarding admitting only female applicants and provide some reasons for holding this opinion. While this seems convincing on the first glance, there are significant underlying flaws regarding this claim that raise doubt about the author’s conclusion.
First, the quality of statistical results could be problematic in two respects, we are not informed whether the Grove College may gain benefit from the results so this results might be distorted and unreliable. Second, we are not informed if the survey was confidential. If not, the students might provide false information that they believed that the questioners might approve of. In either case, the survey results is unreliable.
Second, the argument unfairly relies upon the assumption that for keeping the college financial supports we should keep this tradition but no evidence is offered to prove the causality. A majority of people supporting colleges never care about the school where or how will spend their money. They just want to help schools to develop whether this admits female students or both genders. If the author wants to consider such causality, must provide clear evidence to substantiate this assumption.
In addition, we are not informed regarding programs teaching in the Grove College. Some programs such as Electrical Engineering is more popular among male applicants, on the other hand, field of study such as Art is more popular among female applicants. If the college has just some specific programs that can attract male applicants, it would be better for the college to admit male students because they can succeed and enhance the college prestige.
In sum, this arguments has some clear logical fallacies and lacks concrete evidence to substantiate author’s claim. If the author were to prove more evidence regarding survey, main causality of financial support and programs teaching in the college his or her argument was more convincing.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 200, Rule ID: ON_FIRST_GLANCE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'at'?
Suggestion: at
...is opinion. While this seems convincing on the first glance, there are significant...
^^
Line 5, column 498, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...idence to substantiate this assumption. In addition, we are not informed regardi...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 9, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...nhance the college prestige. In sum, this arguments has some clear logical fallac...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, may, regarding, second, so, while, in addition, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 55.5748502994 56% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1711.0 2260.96107784 76% => OK
No of words: 315.0 441.139720559 71% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.43174603175 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21286593061 4.56307096286 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72075901256 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 204.123752495 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.549206349206 0.468620217663 117% => OK
syllable_count: 523.8 705.55239521 74% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.4042733194 57.8364921388 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.066666667 119.503703932 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0 23.324526521 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 5.70786347227 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.126790144646 0.218282227539 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0428488421879 0.0743258471296 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0391877115051 0.0701772020484 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0714728114549 0.128457276422 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0360775380657 0.0628817314937 57% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 48.3550499002 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.21 12.5979740519 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.69 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 98.500998004 81% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => 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.