While the Department of Education in the state of Attra suggests that high school students be assigned homework every day, the data from a recent statewide survey of high school math and science teachers give us reason to question the usefulness of daily homework. In the district of Sanlee, 86 percent of the teachers reported assigning homework three to five times a week, whereas in the district of Marlee, less than 25 percent of the teachers reported assigning homework three to five times a week. Yet the students in Marlee earn better grades overall and are less likely to be required to repeat a year of school than are the students in Sanlee. Therefore, we recommend that all teachers in our high schools should assign homework no more than twice a week.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The author makes an argument in favor of abandoning the notion of homework after school. They gave suitable evidences bolstering their claim and an accurate conclusion is drawn from them. Stated this way the author's presentation of the argument looks practical and logical, yet on closer inspection the inconsistency of the argument is made visible. Major assumptions with no background information play an important role in the author's claims and without validating these assumptions the argument presented cannot be deemed truthful.
First of all, the author mentions that they have compared the proportionality between the amount of homework and the performance of students in two states of Sanlee and Marlee. Yet the author failed to mention the origin of these states. No sentence in their argument enlightens the place these regions are from. Apart from the failure of mention of the state these districts belong to, the author also had not mentioned the timeline these survey were taken in. To illustrate, if these results obtained were obtained from the year 2000, then they are not valid for a decision making process occurring currently. Hence, stating the argument with an inculcation of the states these districts belongs to and the timeline the comparison was held between the two mentioned districts would make the author more convincing to the reader.
Secondly, the definite criteria of comparison is missing. Assume two states with a population of 100 and 1000. If there are 10 students in each of these states, then that infers that 10% of state 1 and 1% of state 2 are children. Though the number of children are same, the percentages vary greatly with respect to the population. Similarly, the 86% of the Sanlee and the 25% of Marlee could be a same number or Marlee could be larger than Sanlee. Without proper information to compare the decisive data of these states it is impossible to concur with the author's conclusions.
Adding to this, the author mentioned that only mathematics and science teachers or subjects are analyzed in the argument. Disregarding other subjects that are mandatory to students is not recommended. The grade sheet represents the work of a student in all the subjects they are assigned with rather than only mathematics and science. The author should add the details of more subjects that are included in the curriculum of the students to produce an accurate conclusion determining the worth of homework in the education system.
Furthermore, the performance of a student might not entirely depend on their homework. Consider that the district Sanlee was hit with a natural disaster or any other external cause that rendered its students distracted from their studies. If the survey was held in this timeline it is obvious to see that the students in Sanlee are failing. Therfore, incorporating the situations of the district and the circumstances of the students before measuring the capability of the students in their education is needed to make the author more credible.
In conclusion, the author should regroup his argument with better examples and concrete evidences backing his stance in the subject. Without any modifications or additional improvement to their argument, their statements look more like wishful thinking rather than a solution based on substantive data and proofs for ensuring the improvement of quality of education received by the students in the state if Attra.
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 209, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...is drawn from them. Stated this way the authors presentation of the argument looks prac...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 239, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...students distracted from their studies. If the survey was held in this timeline it...
^^
Line 6, column 414, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... by the students in the state if Attra.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, hence, if, look, regarding, second, secondly, similarly, so, then, apart from, in conclusion, first of all, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 11.1786427146 179% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 38.0 28.8173652695 132% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 86.0 55.5748502994 155% => OK
Nominalization: 29.0 16.3942115768 177% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2887.0 2260.96107784 128% => OK
No of words: 556.0 441.139720559 126% => OK
Chars per words: 5.19244604317 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.85588840946 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81889734876 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 261.0 204.123752495 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.469424460432 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 896.4 705.55239521 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 19.7664670659 132% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.0459069604 57.8364921388 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.038461538 119.503703932 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.3846153846 23.324526521 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.73076923077 5.70786347227 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.137918147796 0.218282227539 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0415529855597 0.0743258471296 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0256790966463 0.0701772020484 37% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0752242399944 0.128457276422 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0135360181551 0.0628817314937 22% => 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: 13.7 14.3799401198 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.82 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.65 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 140.0 98.500998004 142% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 209, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...is drawn from them. Stated this way the authors presentation of the argument looks prac...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 239, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...students distracted from their studies. If the survey was held in this timeline it...
^^
Line 6, column 414, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... by the students in the state if Attra.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, hence, if, look, regarding, second, secondly, similarly, so, then, apart from, in conclusion, first of all, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 11.1786427146 179% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 38.0 28.8173652695 132% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 86.0 55.5748502994 155% => OK
Nominalization: 29.0 16.3942115768 177% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2887.0 2260.96107784 128% => OK
No of words: 556.0 441.139720559 126% => OK
Chars per words: 5.19244604317 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.85588840946 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81889734876 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 261.0 204.123752495 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.469424460432 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 896.4 705.55239521 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 19.7664670659 132% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.0459069604 57.8364921388 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.038461538 119.503703932 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.3846153846 23.324526521 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.73076923077 5.70786347227 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.137918147796 0.218282227539 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0415529855597 0.0743258471296 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0256790966463 0.0701772020484 37% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0752242399944 0.128457276422 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0135360181551 0.0628817314937 22% => 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: 13.7 14.3799401198 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.82 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.65 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 140.0 98.500998004 142% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.