The University of Wabash is considering a community service requirement for all undergraduate and graduate students. We believe that the objective of any university is to produce well-rounded and charitable members of society. The proposed graduation requ

In the Dean's newsletter, the author claims that the university will do new requirements to graduate and add a community service requirement at least 8 hours of unpaid community service per month for 9 months. The university claims that this community service will help the students in real life. However, the argument is flawed in different ways. Before reaching the conclusion, some questions must be answered.

First and foremost, we need to understand the reliability of the argument. What is exactly this community service and what is for, and how did they decide this idea.
It is important to know whether the university do this for charity or for students developments to the real life. We need to be sure about this development, I mean how can we expect that wanting money from charities will improve the students development. Finding this job is so suspicious because there are already internship opportunities for students to improve and prepare theirselves to work life. If either of these scenarios has merit, then discovering a job like that does not make sense.

Secondly, students have already so many responsibilities at the university. This kind of job should be willingly, not a restriction. This job can be distract the students focus on their lectures at all. Perhaps, they would not want to do this, but for some students who willing this job can be affect them positively, but giving a restriction won't help students, only pushed them away from lectures. So the author should give some answer for these concerns. Collecting money for the school can be illegal. At this point, school seems to think only money and if the above is true, then the conclusion drawn in the original argument doesn't hold water.

In conclusion, the argument as it stands now, is considerably flawed due to its reliance on unwarranted assumptions. If the author is able to offer more evidence or facts, then it is possible to say the argument is true and reliable.

Votes
Average: 6.3 (3 votes)
Essay Categories

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 234, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'students'' or 'student's'?
Suggestion: students'; student's
...g money from charities will improve the students development. Finding this job is so su...
^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 298, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...inding this job is so suspicious because there are already internship opportuniti...
^^
Line 6, column 632, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...nclusion drawn in the original argument doesnt hold water. In conclusion, the argum...
^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, at least, i mean, in conclusion, kind of

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 13.6137724551 37% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 55.5748502994 59% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1642.0 2260.96107784 73% => OK
No of words: 330.0 441.139720559 75% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.97575757576 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.26214759535 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85112063738 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 204.123752495 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.542424242424 0.468620217663 116% => OK
syllable_count: 504.0 705.55239521 71% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.9586710642 57.8364921388 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.4210526316 119.503703932 72% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.3684210526 23.324526521 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.89473684211 5.70786347227 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
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: 0.135823347777 0.218282227539 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0420425347058 0.0743258471296 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0607629847768 0.0701772020484 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0827634754172 0.128457276422 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0733108768781 0.0628817314937 117% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.7 14.3799401198 74% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 48.3550499002 130% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 12.197005988 71% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.31 12.5979740519 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.49 8.32208582834 90% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 98.500998004 64% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 12.3882235529 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => 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.

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: 19 15
No. of Words: 332 350
No. of Characters: 1595 1500
No. of Different Words: 178 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.269 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.804 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.751 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 107 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 84 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 65 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 38 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.474 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.229 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.684 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.29 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.476 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.091 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5