Several years ago, Groveton College adopted 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. The honor code has proven far more successful: in the first year it 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. Such evidence suggests that all colleges and universities should adopt honor codes similar to Groveton's. This change is sure to result in a dramatic decline in cheating among college students.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
In this argument, the author recommends all colleagues and universities to adopt to honor codes similar to Groveton's, because of its efficiency to reduce cheat number in place. To support his/her claim, the author cites the comparison of cheating number between honor code and teacher-sponored-monitor, yearly report of cheating number under honor codes, as well as one recent survey for honor codes. Quite convincing though such recommendation appears at first glance, there exists several questions regarding his/her lines of reasoning that requires further analysis. Therefore, the author's recommendation could end up being pretty convincing or invalid in the end, depending on the answers to these questions.
To start off, the author's reasoning heavily relies on whether the same cheating standard has been used for both honor codes and teacher-sponored-monitor, a question that is not yet answered. It is possible that honor codes program doesn't have the same principle and rules as the teacher's monitoring program, because students' scores of exams heavily impact their future improvement and job status in a long run. Without additional information to evaluate whether both of them are equal, it is likely that honor codes executed by students could open a loose end for them in order to give them a higher possibility to win good score via some suspected behaviors . Such phenomenon could heavily challenge the author's judgement about the efficiency of honor code progam and render the author's recommendation much less advisable. On the contrary, any valid proof that ? could strengthen the author's suggestion.
Granted that both of two program have the same standards and given the fact that decreasing cheating number, whether such honor codes program actually work efficiently needs a second look. Behind the author's recommendation lie two critical implications. The first one is that cheating number represents all the truth for the severity of dishonest behaviors in the exam. However, the probability that out of those seeming a few cheating case several cheating behaviors could be more flagarous than other must be considered and addressed. Yet, if the author could show that all of cheating behavior are under the same severity level, his/her recommendation will gain more weights.
Furthermore, the second implication is that the decrease int the recent five years stand for the trend in the future. While five years trend normally give credit for evaluation of educational result, the probability that cheating number trend might breach the trend in the future could not be precluded in advance. For example, as universities might introduce more difficult course later, and students who want to get hight score might resort to dishonest behavior to keep their high performance . Thus, we have no clues that cheating number would increase suddenly with changes of adoption of new course. If the course system keeps stable, such decline of cheating number is likely to stand for the trends and the author's recommendation will be strengthened. By contrast, the reverse trend could be expected from the unstable difficulty level of courses.
Finally, while we can acknowledge for a moment that cheating situation actually turn well after adoption of honor codes, it remains to be seen whether such program could be efficiently applied for such campus. Other factors, such as student qualities and university budgets, could also impact such application of program. If students' quality in other universities are averagedly poorer then Groventon, we are reluctant to say the same effect could be guaranteed by honor code program.
In summary, while cheating number decline is a good indication out of honor code, this is a conclusion that could not be derived from the information available in the passage. Even if honor code actually work for Groventon, its adoption for others is still built upon implications, which are open to different probabilities. Only after these questions could be adequately addressed can we efficiently evaluate the author's recommendation and draw a logically sound conclusion.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK, but better to say: maybe other reasons caused the decline.
argument 2 -- duplicated. need to argue against the survey:
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.
argument 3 -- duplicated
argument 4 -- OK
-----------------------
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: 26 15
No. of Words: 648 350
No. of Characters: 3414 1500
No. of Different Words: 308 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 5.045 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.269 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.936 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 244 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 191 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 144 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 90 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.923 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.736 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.692 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.309 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.527 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.148 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 76, Rule ID: ADOPT_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'adapt to'?
Suggestion: adapt to
...ends all colleagues and universities to adopt to honor codes similar to Grovetons, becau...
^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 586, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...quires further analysis. Therefore, the authors recommendation could end up being prett...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 232, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...It is possible that honor codes program doesnt have the same principle and rules as th...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 659, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
... good score via some suspected behaviors . Such phenomenon could heavily challenge...
^^
Line 5, column 706, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... phenomenon could heavily challenge the authors judgement about the efficiency of honor...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 781, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ncy of honor code progam and render the authors recommendation much less advisable. On ...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 865, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Could
...On the contrary, any valid proof that ? could strengthen the authors suggestion. ...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 886, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...valid proof that ? could strengthen the authors suggestion. Granted that both of t...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 26, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'program' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'programs'.
Suggestion: programs
...ggestion. Granted that both of two program have the same standards and given the f...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 201, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ciently needs a second look. Behind the authors recommendation lie two critical implica...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 503, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...viors could be more flagarous than other must be considered and addressed. Yet, i...
^^
Line 13, column 496, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
... behavior to keep their high performance . Thus, we have no clues that cheating nu...
^^
Line 13, column 716, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... likely to stand for the trends and the authors recommendation will be strengthened. By...
^^^^^^^
Line 17, column 387, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[3]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
...ther universities are averagedly poorer then Groventon, we are reluctant to say the ...
^^^^
Line 21, column 415, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...dressed can we efficiently evaluate the authors recommendation and draw a logically sou...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, look, regarding, second, so, still, then, therefore, thus, well, while, for example, in summary, of course, such as, as well as, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.9520958084 170% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 28.8173652695 139% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 70.0 55.5748502994 126% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 16.3942115768 146% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3503.0 2260.96107784 155% => OK
No of words: 644.0 441.139720559 146% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.43944099379 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.0375743251 4.56307096286 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01126424481 2.78398813304 108% => OK
Unique words: 311.0 204.123752495 152% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.482919254658 0.468620217663 103% => OK
syllable_count: 1074.6 705.55239521 152% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 11.0 2.70958083832 406% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.22255489022 213% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 19.7664670659 137% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.7789169588 57.8364921388 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.740740741 119.503703932 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.8518518519 23.324526521 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.48148148148 5.70786347227 131% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 15.0 5.25449101796 285% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.20758483034 171% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => 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: 0.232693099454 0.218282227539 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0706813410017 0.0743258471296 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.054823083911 0.0701772020484 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.141770167489 0.128457276422 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0273558190949 0.0628817314937 44% => 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: 16.1 14.3799401198 112% => 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: 14.57 12.5979740519 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.8 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 164.0 98.500998004 166% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
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.