According to a recent report, cheating among college and university students is on the rise. However, Groveton College has successfully reduced student cheating by adopting an honor code, which calls for students to agree not to cheat in their academic endeavors and to notify a faculty member if they suspect that others have cheated. Groveton's honor code replaced a system in which teachers closely monitored students; under that system, teachers reported an average of thirty cases of cheating per year. In the first year the honor code was in place, students reported twenty-one cases of cheating; five years later, this figure had dropped to fourteen. Moreover, in a recent survey, a majority of Groveton students said that they would be less likely to cheat with an honor code in place than without. Thus, all colleges and universities should adopt honor codes similar to Groveton's in order to decrease cheating among students.
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 proposes that all colleges should adopt honor codes in order to decrease cheating among students because Groventon reported reduced cheating after they adopted the honor code. He or she offers an interesting argument, but it suffers from some logical flaws and gaps in evidence. While connections suggested are reasonable, there are many other possible scenarios that should discourage all universities from choosing honor code to replace an old system.
To begin with, the author claims that honor code actually decrease the cheating by presenting the fact that fewer cheating was reported after adopting honor code. Yet comparing only absolute numbers of cheating could be misleading. We should consider other factors such as total numbers of students or number of students related to each cheating before calculating the effect of honor code. For example, if Groventon College has much less students currently comparing to before, cheating per students actually might increased during last five years. What is more, author offers no information about how many students were related to each cheating. Let us assume that average numbers of the students related to each cheating is ten currently, whereas average was 3 before the adoption of honor code. Then we could say that more students committed cheating after selecting honor code. Therefore without accessing to information about total students in Groventon or number of students related to each cheating, we cannot conclude that honor code is effective cheating inhibitor.
Secondly, the author assumes that honor code decrease the cheating because fewer incidence of cheating was reported. Yet, we cannot determine whether cheating actually reduced during the period. We cannot be sure only fourteen cheating has occurred currently. Students may be reluctant to report his colleague's malfeasance even though they noticed cheating. Cheating may actually occurred much more frequently than faculty noticed. Therefore it is hasty to believe that only fourteen cheating has occurred and therefore the honor code performs great at reducing cheating.
Let us assume though that the cheating per students and cheating itself actually decrease after establishing honor code. Then we are prompted to ask whether decrease in cheating was really due to honor code. There are many factors that can affect the incidence of cheating. For example, Groventon might adopt stronger punish system during the same period and might cause decrease in cheating. Or high school or college might provide focused education about cheating to prospective university students and cause reduced numbers of cheating. Student's better awareness of cheating's gravity might inhibit cheating. Likewise there are too many possible factors other than honor code that can discourage cheating.
Finally the author presents the recent survey as evidence to his or her claim. The author assumes that student's unwillingness to cheating will lead to decrease in cheating. Yet there is no reason to believe that student's actual behavior will correspond to the survey. Many surveys conducted at the start of a new year find that people are devoted to losing weight by not eating fast food and high calorie food. Yet we usually see they failed to forbearing these foods. Likewise, there could be increase in cheating even though the students said that they would be less likely to cheat under honor code.
To sum, the author's assumption that adopting honor code is effective at reducing cheating in all universities and colleges is logically flawed based on the above mentioned reasons. To strengthen his or her argument, the author should closely examine all the conditions and possible factors. In conclusion, the author's argument reflects unsupported claims without clear reasons or evidence.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-22 | swetha_14r | 68 | view |
| 2023-02-26 | 宋致遠 | 60 | view |
| 2023-01-21 | jimHsu | 54 | view |
| 2022-12-26 | rohan.apte | 72 | view |
| 2022-09-05 | poiuy23567 | 66 | view |
- People s behavior is largely determined by forces not of their own making 58
- The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them not by their contemporaries 66
- To be an effective leader a public official must maintain the highest ethical and moral standards 62
- Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the Palean people Recently however archaeol 50
- The surest indicator of a great nation is represented not by the achievements of its rulers artists or scientists but by the general welfare of its people 66
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 8 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 33 15
No. of Words: 593 350
No. of Characters: 3180 1500
No. of Different Words: 256 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.935 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.363 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.517 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 267 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 212 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 160 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 60 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.97 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.162 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.636 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.355 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.536 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.211 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 429, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to honor'
Suggestion: to honor
...scourage all universities from choosing honor code to replace an old system. To be...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 435, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun students is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
... example, if Groventon College has much less students currently comparing to before,...
^^^^
Line 3, column 884, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...ed cheating after selecting honor code. Therefore without accessing to information about ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 433, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...h more frequently than faculty noticed. Therefore it is hasty to believe that only fourte...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 612, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Likewise,
...eatings gravity might inhibit cheating. Likewise there are too many possible factors oth...
^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Finally,
...r code that can discourage cheating. Finally the author presents the recent survey a...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 104, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'students'' or 'student's'?
Suggestion: students'; student's
...s or her claim. The author assumes that students unwillingness to cheating will lead to ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 11, column 13, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... cheat under honor code. To sum, the authors assumption that adopting honor code is ...
^^^^^^^
Line 11, column 311, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...nd possible factors. In conclusion, the authors argument reflects unsupported claims wi...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, finally, if, likewise, may, really, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, whereas, while, as to, for example, in conclusion, such as, to begin with, what is more
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.9520958084 170% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 11.1786427146 179% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 41.0 28.8173652695 142% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 72.0 55.5748502994 130% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3241.0 2260.96107784 143% => OK
No of words: 593.0 441.139720559 134% => OK
Chars per words: 5.46543001686 5.12650576532 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.93473315629 4.56307096286 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55644012992 2.78398813304 92% => OK
Unique words: 262.0 204.123752495 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.441821247892 0.468620217663 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1002.6 705.55239521 142% => 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: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 33.0 19.7664670659 167% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.9234137709 57.8364921388 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.2121212121 119.503703932 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.9696969697 23.324526521 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.36363636364 5.70786347227 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 5.25449101796 171% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 26.0 6.88822355289 377% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.431690733933 0.218282227539 198% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.131419602422 0.0743258471296 177% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100469856733 0.0701772020484 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.254319247777 0.128457276422 198% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0799489869925 0.0628817314937 127% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.15 12.5979740519 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.1 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 136.0 98.500998004 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.