"Last year the number of students who enrolled in online degree programs offered by nearby Omni University increased by 50 percent. During the same year, Omni showed a significant decrease from prior years in expenditures for dormitory and classroom space, most likely because online instruction takes place via the Internet. In contrast, over the past three years, enrollment at Humana University has failed to grow and the cost of maintaining buildings has increased. Thus, to increase enrollment and solve the problem of budget deficits at Humana University, we should initiate and actively promote online degree programs like those at Omni."
The memo states that because Omni university showed a significant increase in the enrollment of online programs last year which makes a decrease in the expenses for dormitory and classrooms, Humana university should views it a model in order to attract students and save cost. However, the argument rests on several unsubstantiated assumptions and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.
Citing the report of a 50 percent increase of students in Omni university, the author claims that the online degree program draw students successfully. Nevertheless, there is the possibility of a more than 50 percent loss of students from physical classes. It is also possible that students prefer to attend class online last year because there was economic crisis and online classes were cheaper. Or, perhaps, there was a pandemic going on and learning online was a better option. It is never easy to use an annul report to predict a long-term trend. In order to verify the assumption, more details of the report are required.
In addition, the author says that Omni university decreases expenditure for dormitory and classroom because most of the students change into online classes. Still, there is a good chance that the school actually makes a renovation over the buildings and change into energy efficient facility. To save budget on maintaining building is one thing, to promote online classrooms is quite another. There are many other ways to cut down the cost of the buildings.
Moreover, the memo mentioned that Humana university fails to attract student simply because of lacking online program. Granted that good online programs can attract students is true, it does not necessary follow that the lack of students can attribute to no online programs. The author fails to consider if it is the problem of the old school hardware, unfriendly environment or teacher with bad reputation.
In a nutshell, the argument seems to be reliable at first glance, but it may fall apart upon closer scrutiny. The author needs to address several unproven assumption to strengthen the argument.
- The following appeared in a memo from a budget planner for the city of Grandview It is time for the city of Grandview to stop funding the Grandview Symphony Orchestra It is true that the symphony struggled financially for many years but last year private 78
- The following memorandum is from the business manager of Happy Pancake House restaurants Butter has now been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the southwestern United States Only about 2 percent of customers have complain 83
- 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 87
- According to a recent report from our marketing department during the past year fewer people attended Super Screen produced movies than in any other year And yet the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers about specific Super Screen movies actu 60
- The Mozart School of Music should be the first choice for parents considering enrolling their child in music lessons First of all the Mozart School welcomes youngsters at all ability and age levels there is no audition to attend the school Second the scho 50
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 2 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 4 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 337 350
No. of Characters: 1707 1500
No. of Different Words: 181 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.285 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.065 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.691 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 143 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 100 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 71 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 36 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.824 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.61 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.471 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.31 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.557 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.052 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 389, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...is therefore unpersuasive as it stands. Citing the report of a 50 percent increa...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 507, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
... better option. It is never easy to use an annul report to predict a long-term trend. In...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, however, if, may, moreover, nevertheless, so, still, then, therefore, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.9520958084 31% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 28.8173652695 52% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 55.5748502994 77% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1757.0 2260.96107784 78% => OK
No of words: 337.0 441.139720559 76% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.21364985163 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28457229495 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78792818484 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 185.0 204.123752495 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.548961424332 0.468620217663 117% => OK
syllable_count: 551.7 705.55239521 78% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 48.4997057031 57.8364921388 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.352941176 119.503703932 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8235294118 23.324526521 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.41176470588 5.70786347227 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => 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: 0.313614329539 0.218282227539 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.080270401579 0.0743258471296 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.105987886646 0.0701772020484 151% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.152266823754 0.128457276422 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.102495536185 0.0628817314937 163% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 14.3799401198 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.3550499002 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.5979740519 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.7 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 98.500998004 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 12.3882235529 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.25 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.