Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
"Fifteen years ago, Omega University implemented a new procedure that encouraged
students to evaluate the teaching effectiveness of all their professors. Since that time, Omega
professors have begun to assign higher grades in their classes, and overall student grade
averages at Omega have risen by thirty percent. Potential employers apparently believe the
grades at Omega are inflated; this would explain why Omega graduates have not been as
successful at getting jobs as have graduates from nearby Alpha University. To enable its
graduates to secure better jobs, Omega University should now terminate student evaluation of
professors."
In this memo the evaluation processes in Omega University which propels students to appraise the status of their instructors is rejected. To justify the conclusion, the article’s author notes that even the performances of students reach up to 30 percent more than before this approach, the students deal with more challenges to discover their ideal jobs in comparison with the students educating in Alpha University. Consequently, it seems more applicable to root this program up. Close scrutiny this fact, reveals that none of it cause to credible support to the recommendation.
Nor does the mere fact that the students in Omega University are not successful in finding the appropriate vocations and this cannot be pertained to the evaluation process. Since the origin of this drawback may be attributed to the lack of existence of proper careers for them. In fact, the more the level of educated students increases, the less prevalence of jobs which are adaptable to their qualification will be unearthed. Based on this explanation, the memo encompasses no evidence to support this presumption. Hence, it is critically substantial to provide the backgrounds for the well-educated persons such as those who are trained in Omega University to have a chance to access to their desire jobs.
A threshold assumption upon which the recommendation relies is that eradicating the method of assessing the professors by the students. Nevertheless, it should be emphasized that this approach can play as a stimulus for both the lecturers and the pupils to make their strength to reach the best performance in academic subjects. With eliminating this, it can be anticipated that the motivation of students will be lowered to its lowest point, accordingly, the declination and despondent become ubiquitous in Omega University. Thus, the dean ignores the detrimental repercussions of deleting this process.
As for the survey that the article cites the inflation of scores of students may push the students toward the obstacles in achieving their careers conveniently. Conversely, it is conspicuous that only when the quality of employers in one corporation is in high degree, can it be expected that both the quality and quantity of the out-put of firm reach a climax. Therefore, the evaluation process to measure the situation of orators in imparting their knowledge to the students as they should can be deemed as one of determining factors in elevating the condition of one company to the zenith point. As a matter of the fact, here the significance of pursuing this method as an effective strategy can be thoroughly comprehended.
In sum, the argument is logically flawed and therefore untenable as it stands. To bolster the recommendation, the dean must insert the role of providing the appropriate job ambiance for students after graduation, inhibit from attenuating the quality of University by extricating the evaluation process and finally, contemplating the importance of this evaluation to augmenting the yield of various corporations.
(481 words)
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 331, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'discovering'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'challenge' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: discovering
... the students deal with more challenges to discover their ideal jobs in comparison with the...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 488, Rule ID: CLOSE_SCRUTINY[1]
Message: Use simply 'scrutiny'.
Suggestion: Scrutiny
...re applicable to root this program up. Close scrutiny this fact, reveals that none of it caus...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 605, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “As” 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.
...repercussions of deleting this process. As for the survey that the article cites t...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, but, consequently, conversely, finally, hence, if, may, nevertheless, so, therefore, thus, well, as for, in fact, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 41.0 28.8173652695 142% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 79.0 55.5748502994 142% => OK
Nominalization: 27.0 16.3942115768 165% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2577.0 2260.96107784 114% => OK
No of words: 483.0 441.139720559 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.33540372671 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68799114503 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18881850465 2.78398813304 115% => OK
Unique words: 247.0 204.123752495 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.511387163561 0.468620217663 109% => OK
syllable_count: 810.0 705.55239521 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 75.5714231704 57.8364921388 131% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.631578947 119.503703932 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.4210526316 23.324526521 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.05263157895 5.70786347227 124% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0712650477255 0.218282227539 33% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0247350112255 0.0743258471296 33% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0303843967327 0.0701772020484 43% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0458580951843 0.128457276422 36% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0276279000302 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: 16.4 14.3799401198 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.3550499002 78% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.99 12.5979740519 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.71 8.32208582834 117% => OK
difficult_words: 148.0 98.500998004 150% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.