At one high school, more of its students than ever before have been caught cheating on their homework assignments; for example, many students have asked other students to provide them with answers for assignments. The school is considering making a change to help decrease the number of students who cheat on homework. Which ONE of the following actions do you think will be most effective, and why?
-Asking parents to monitor their children as they do their homework and confirm that their children have not cheated
-Increasing the penalty (punishment) for cheating
-Asking teachers to create homework assignments that will make it more difficult for students to cheat
Some people think that asking parents to monitor their children as they do their homework is the best way to prevent students from cheating. Others claim that increasing the penalty for cheating is a more favorable approach. Still, others maintain that asking teachers to create homework assignments that will make it more difficult for students to cheat is more judicious. As far as I am concerned, I believe that the second option is the most preferable way to solve such a problem. My reasons are as follows.
To begin with, in order to decrease the number of students who cheat on homework, school must ensure that students do not have any motivation to cheat, and increasing the penalty for cheating can undoubtedly dissuade students to cheat. For instance, my university forced every student who cheated on their assignments to leave the school. Since students were exceptionally concerned about getting an undergraduate degree, no one in my university dare to risk their future and commit plagiarism just to get a high score. Accordingly, my college's harsh penalty completely eradicated students' intention to cheat on their assignments. Contrarily, my brother's university asked parents to constantly monitor their children as they do some schoolwork. Unfortunately, some parents care more about their kids' future rather than their kids' honest personalities, so they were prone to forgive their children whenever they cheated. As a result, the number of students who committed cheating did not decrease in the end. So apparently, if the first policy is implemented, students would still have enough incentive to deceive themselves on their assignments.
In addition, in order to decrease the number of students who cheat on their assignments, the university must not waste too many resources, and increasing the penalty for cheating can prevent schools from spending too many resources. Take my college again as an example. My university only spent three days asking the student council to write down the detailed regulation that increases the punishment for cheating. Furthermore, my school only allocated 1000 dollars to hire some experts to assist the student council in drawing up the regulation. Conspicuously, increasing the punishment for cheating requires few to no resources. Contrarily, my university once suggested college professors to design homework that is resistant to plagiarism. Nevertheless, the professors spent more than a million dollars purchasing an anti-cheating system from a machine learning corporation. Also, the professors spent hours and hours per day adjusting questions to make sure that students cannot cheat on their schoolwork. Eventually, hours of time and millions of dollars were wasted merely creating homework that was purposely designed to prevent students from deception. So apparently, devising anti-cheating assignments requires too much time, effort, and budget.
In conclusion, I maintain that increasing the penalty for cheating is the most advisable approach, considering the aforementioned reasons.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, apparently, first, furthermore, if, nevertheless, second, so, still, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 15.1003584229 79% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 9.8082437276 71% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 13.8261648746 43% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.0286738351 136% => OK
Pronoun: 41.0 43.0788530466 95% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 52.1666666667 104% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.0752688172 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2596.0 1977.66487455 131% => OK
No of words: 468.0 407.700716846 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.54700854701 4.8611393121 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65116196802 4.48103885553 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04060354613 2.67179642975 114% => OK
Unique words: 229.0 212.727598566 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.489316239316 0.524837075471 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 784.8 618.680645161 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 9.59856630824 94% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.6003584229 117% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.3844557224 48.9658058833 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.166666667 100.406767564 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5 20.6045352989 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.5 5.45110844103 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 11.8709677419 25% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 14.0 3.85842293907 363% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.88709677419 143% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.37968140843 0.236089414692 161% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.110933881519 0.076458572812 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0872978963438 0.0737576698707 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.231937972719 0.150856017488 154% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0883101833941 0.0645574589148 137% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 11.7677419355 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 58.1214874552 75% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.1575268817 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.91 10.9000537634 137% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.43 8.01818996416 105% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 86.8835125448 131% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.002688172 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.247311828 146% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.