The following recommendation was made by the president and administrative staff of Grove College, a private institution, to the college's governing committee.
"We recommend that Grove College preserve its century-old tradition of all-female education rather than admit men into its programs. It is true that a majority of faculty members voted in favor of coeducation, arguing that it would encourage more students to apply to Grove. But 80 percent of the students responding to a survey conducted by the student government wanted the school to remain all female, and over half of the alumnae who answered a separate survey also opposed coeducation. Keeping the college all female will improve morale among students and convince alumnae to keep supporting the college financially."
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The author maintains that Grove College should not admit male students as it will improve morale among the female students, as well as convince alumnae to continue donating to the institution. To support this recommendation, the author reasons that two separate surveys were done, both which resulted in the majority voting to keep the school all-female. Stated in this way, there is a lack of details regarding the survey, creating a discrepancy in the author’s claims. Under careful scrutiny, the evidence reveals that there is no support for the conclusion that morale or financial support will improve. Therefore, the author’s argument can be considered lacking and unsubstantiated.
First of all, the author assumes that morale will improve through the female student body because 80 percent of the students were in favor of not admitting any males into their school. This is merely a baseless assumption made without any solid ground. For example, the female students want to stick with the school’s tradition of only having females, but no where does it specify how sticking to this tradition will improve morale. Hence, if the argument would have been considerably strengthened if had explicitly stated the 80 percent of students who voted no on coeducation had specifically written on the survey why they felt the school should continue to be all female.
Moreover, the argument also assumes that students who have already graduated will continue supporting the college because over half of the alumnae opposed coeducation on another survey. This again is a weak claim as it is unsuccessful in establishing a clear parallel between opposing coeducation and the continued donations from the graduated students. To illustrate, the evidence did not reveal if the survey included questions surrounding donations or if they would continue if coeducation was enacted. As a result, if it was stated that the survey revealed that alumnae would only continue donating if the school remained all-female, then it would have been more convincing to the reader.
Third, the author does bring up the fact that a major of faculty members are in favor of coeducation as it would lead to more students attending. If more students attended would Grove College be financially stable and not have to depend on charitable donations from alumane? Are there any other beneficial reasons that faculty members may be in support of coeducation, like having a more diverse population in the student body which might expand the female student’s perspectives and knowledge? Without convincing answers to these questions, the author’s present conclusion seems more wishful thinking rather than a substantive recommendation.
In conclusion, the author’s weak argument stemming from the aforementioned details are therefore questionable. To considerably strengthened the claims, specific details pertaining to the survey must be mentioned like comments made by the female students themselves or questions about financial support from the alumnae. Ultimately, to better evaluate the argument, there a bigger picture has to be provided so that other possible factors and opnions dealing with coeducation can be examined. Consequently, without this information, the author’s recommendation of keeping the college all-female remains equivocal and open to debate.
- The following appeared as part of a letter to the editor of a scientific journal."A recent study of eighteen rhesus monkeys provides clues as to the effects of birth order on an individual's levels of stimulation. The study showed that in stimul 42
- The following recommendation was made by the president and administrative staff of Grove College, a private institution, to the college's governing committee."We recommend that Grove College preserve its century-old tradition of all-female educa 69
- Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain.Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position 83
- Claim: Governments must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support they need in order to thrive.Reason: It is primarily in cities that a nation's cultural traditions are preserved and generated.Write a response in which you discuss 61
- The following appeared as a letter to the editor from a Central Plaza store owner."Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Ce 82
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 517 350
No. of Characters: 2770 1500
No. of Different Words: 245 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.768 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.358 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.863 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 231 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 185 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 123 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 70 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.619 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.55 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.714 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.323 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.533 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.076 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 363, Rule ID: NOW[2]
Message: Did you mean 'now' (=at this moment) instead of 'no' (negation)?
Suggestion: now
...s tradition of only having females, but no where does it specify how sticking to t...
^^
Line 5, column 463, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had been'?
Suggestion: had been
... improve morale. Hence, if the argument would have been considerably strengthened if had explic...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 567, Rule ID: NOW[2]
Message: Did you mean 'now' (=at this moment) instead of 'no' (negation)?
Suggestion: now
...ed the 80 percent of students who voted no on coeducation had specifically written...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, hence, if, may, moreover, regarding, so, then, therefore, third, well, as to, for example, in conclusion, as a result, as well as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.9520958084 139% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 55.5748502994 112% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 16.3942115768 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2882.0 2260.96107784 127% => OK
No of words: 517.0 441.139720559 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.57446808511 5.12650576532 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.76839952204 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07330437234 2.78398813304 110% => OK
Unique words: 253.0 204.123752495 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.489361702128 0.468620217663 104% => OK
syllable_count: 895.5 705.55239521 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.22255489022 213% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.0162478021 57.8364921388 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.238095238 119.503703932 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.619047619 23.324526521 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.33333333333 5.70786347227 146% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.20758483034 158% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0970271510634 0.218282227539 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0337487812999 0.0743258471296 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0440920948642 0.0701772020484 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0595320415691 0.128457276422 46% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0157336635612 0.0628817314937 25% => 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: 17.1 14.3799401198 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.3550499002 80% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.32 12.5979740519 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.01 8.32208582834 108% => OK
difficult_words: 137.0 98.500998004 139% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.