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 requirement would be to complete at least 8 hours of unpaid community service per month for a total of 9 months. The Dean’s office will maintain a list of approved local charities on its website with contact information. This is a fantastic opportunity for students to give back to the community and gain real-world working experience. Most importantly, local charities in need will receive the help that they need to continue their efforts.
Dean of the university came with the plan how to construct "well-rounded and charitable members of society" from university's students. The plan is to introduce obligatory charitable work for each of them, in order to let them learn the value of such service for the overall well being of the society. On which assumptions wthis argument is based?
First assumption which should be analysed is the causal one stated, and therefore, that community servise lead to the creation of charitable members of the community. As far as the argument is missing any clue, why the assumption is reliable, it might support or weaken the agendaof the Wabash University respectively. Without some empirical results, it is impossible to know if the relationship is correct. It also might be the case, that there are other variables, than community servise, that affect students in their prospective charitable views in the future. Complementary ethics classes might be necessary in order to explain the students exactly why they need the passed through community servise and even, whan kind of impact their action may have. Without such an information, student could see the obligatory classes even negatively and turn away from their charitable futures.
Second important assumption of the argument, in case that the first assumption is proven as valid, is the time of the charitable servise required in order to create well rounded members of society. There is neither evidence in place stating, that 8 hours per 9 months is enough time for students to experience some positive life changing activity and that this time is enough to have considerable impact on their futures. They migh need more time than than to get used to charitable work and subsequently see this work as obligatory and moral part of their life. They might need more time to undesrand the positive impact of their action indeed. But, it might be that this period might be sufficient and there is no need for additional obligatory work. Without any valid evidence, the assumption may also weaken and strenghten the university's proposal.
Moreover, the practical way in which university is planning to apply. the agenda is, to maintain the list of the charities on their website. This can work in case, that students are well informed about this fact, or that they have a tendency to visit the university website offten enough to be aware about this information. If they tend to visit the website of their university often enough, or if they are aware of the information on the website, there is not certain causal relationship in place indicating that they will be willing to work for the charities afterwards. They might finish their obligation required by the university and do not get back to the charities again. In this case, tha assumption is, that they are aware of the information on the website, and subsequently, they are willing enough to use this information to contact the charity and help them to receive the need.
The argument of the University of Wabash Dean rely on many unstated assumptions. Even though the idea is very beneficial for any student's future, unfortunately, there is no indicator, that it would work in practice.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 531 350
No. of Characters: 2614 1500
No. of Different Words: 221 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.8 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.923 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.713 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 174 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 141 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 100 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 71 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.136 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.032 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.3 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.51 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.082 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 99, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...the first assumption is proven as valid, is the time of the charitable servise re...
^^
Line 9, column 449, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: than
...their futures. They migh need more time than than to get used to charitable work and subs...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 71, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
... which university is planning to apply. the agenda is, to maintain the list of the ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, may, moreover, second, so, therefore, well, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 32.0 19.6327345309 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.9520958084 147% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 47.0 28.8173652695 163% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 69.0 55.5748502994 124% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2699.0 2260.96107784 119% => OK
No of words: 531.0 441.139720559 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08286252354 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.80035803286 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84212550907 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 231.0 204.123752495 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.435028248588 0.468620217663 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 859.5 705.55239521 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 16.0 4.96107784431 323% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 9.0 4.22255489022 213% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.52595964 57.8364921388 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.347826087 119.503703932 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0869565217 23.324526521 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.17391304348 5.70786347227 56% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.20758483034 171% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => 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: 0.174976641492 0.218282227539 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0577330946593 0.0743258471296 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.052490527595 0.0701772020484 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.118939239131 0.128457276422 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0517174257507 0.0628817314937 82% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.48 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.11 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 112.0 98.500998004 114% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => 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.