The following appeared in a letter written from a
supervisor to the administrator of a teaching hospital
where both were employed.
“Ten years ago, the teaching hospital set into
motion a new program that allowed students to eval-
uate the teaching effectiveness of all their supervi-
sors. Since then, hospital supervisors have begun to
give higher scores in student evaluations, and overall
student grade averages at the hospital have risen by
about twenty percent. Other teaching hospitals
apparently believe the grades at the teaching hospi-
tal are inflated; this could indicate why our teaching
hospital graduates have not been as successful at
gaining full-time employment compared to gradu-
ates from nearby University Hospital. To enable its
graduates to secure better jobs, the teaching hospital
should now terminate student rating of teaching hos-
pital supervisors.”
The dean that wrote the letter has an illogical
sequence in his causal chain. He indicates the students
receive higher grades, because they can evaluatesupervisors, and, as a result of this, other potential
employers do not hire the graduates. This seems like
a plausible argument at first glance, but, upon closer
scrutiny, it falls apart. Let’s view its components
more closely.
It is certainly possible that students perceived as
having inflated grades may not be hired as quickly
as those students they are in competition with, espe-
cially if the grades have risen by about 20%. Yet, the
writer goes a step further and proposes to discontin-
ue student evaluation of supervisors. He says, “To
enable its graduates to secure better jobs, the teach-
ing hospital should now terminate student rating of
. . . supervisors.” One can fairly easily see that the
writer makes a leap of faith if we turn the sentence
around. It would look like this: “terminating student
rating of supervisors would enable the teaching hos-
pital graduates to secure better jobs. This is where
the writer errs in his logical sequence. One must
recall that the supposed grade inflation was a possi-
ble hindrance to the graduates’ hiring with other
local employers; therefore, the immediate discontin-
uation of student rating would not necessarily have
any impact at all on the graduates’ employability oreven the actual hiring. This is true for several rea-
sons. First, the stigma would still remain with the
students—if indeed that were a factor to begin with.
Second, it could take months or even years to over-
come the stigma and return to normalcy. Third, the
comparison of employability that the dean provided
was to the students at University hospital, whose hir-
ing rate was higher than graduates of teaching hos-
pital. We have no information on the students from
the University hospital. The school there could have
better programs. Their students may receive train-
ing for formal interviews. The students may indeed
be better qualified. Finally, the students themselves
from the teaching hospital could lack the back-
ground necessary to succeed or even compete for
that matter. The argument the dean provides is
fraught with numerous contingencies. Some final
comments are in order.
For one to give such an overwhelmingly pat
answer to such a monstrous problem as weak
employability takes root in serious logical problems.
The sequence presupposes an outcome that relies on
too many links in the chain. As a result, the argument
is too weak to be logically sound.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-01-04 | Bipin Bhattarai | 62 | view |
- The well-being of a society is enhanced when many of its people question authority. 88
- To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities. 87
- Formal education tends to restrain our minds and sprits rather than sets them free 89
- Formal education tends to restrain our minds and sprits rather than sets them free. 92
- The following appeared in a letter written from asupervisor to the administrator of a teaching hospitalwhere both were employed.“Ten years ago, the teaching hospital set intomotion a new program that allowed students to eval-uate the teaching effectiven 62
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 14, column 45, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...le its graduates to secure better jobs, the teach- ing hospital should now terminate stu...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 15, column 53, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
... should now terminate student rating of . . . supervisors.' One can fairly e...
^^
Line 16, column 3, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...ould now terminate student rating of . . . supervisors.' One can fairly eas...
^
Line 16, column 5, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...ld now terminate student rating of . . . supervisors.' One can fairly easil...
^
Line 16, column 7, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Supervisors
... now terminate student rating of . . . supervisors.' One can fairly easily see that t...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 26, column 99, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun rea seems to be countable; consider using: 'several '.
Suggestion: several
...ven the actual hiring. This is true for several rea- sons. First, the stigma would still r...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, if, look, may, second, so, still, therefore, third, as to, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 55.5748502994 85% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2266.0 2260.96107784 100% => OK
No of words: 418.0 441.139720559 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.42105263158 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52162009685 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94807170383 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 245.0 204.123752495 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.586124401914 0.468620217663 125% => OK
syllable_count: 666.9 705.55239521 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 4.96107784431 242% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 15.0 8.76447105788 171% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.8473053892 70% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 62.1522517693 57.8364921388 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.64 119.503703932 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.72 23.324526521 72% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.24 5.70786347227 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 48.0 5.15768463074 931% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 12.0 4.67664670659 257% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.14299368913 0.218282227539 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0362944669045 0.0743258471296 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0429393843811 0.0701772020484 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0292386814059 0.128457276422 23% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0429055470709 0.0628817314937 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 14.3799401198 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 48.3550499002 114% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.86 12.5979740519 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.51 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 98.500998004 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.1389221557 75% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
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.