The following appeared in a letter from a department chairperson to the president of Pierce University. "Some studies conducted by Bronston College, which is also located in a small town, reveal that both male and female professors are happier living in small towns when their spouses are also employed in the same geographic area. Therefore, in the interest of attracting the most gifted teachers and researchers to our faculty and improving the morale of our entire staff, we at Pierce University should offer employment to the spouse of each new faculty member we hire. Although we cannot expect all offers to be accepted or to be viewed as an ideal job offer, the money invested in this effort will clearly be well spent because, if their spouses have a chance of employment, new professors will be more likely to accept our offers. " Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument.
The argument states that the Pierce University would be attractive for the most gifted professors if the university offers employment to the spouses of new professors. The article seems well presented, but is actually poorly reasoned. The statement is relied on unstated assumptions and unreliable logics as shown in the following essay.
First, The assumption which the argument is based on is that the most gifted teachers and researchers value the policy of Pierce University offering jobs to the spouses of new professors. However, what Pierce University offers to the new professors may be a slightly better warfare to the faculties, but may not be a prior concern for those gifted professors. These professors may value the other factors more in choosing the university they will work for, such as the fame of the university, facility conditions, and neighborhood. If this is the case, the money Pierce University spent on the policy should be spent on other aspects that the talented teachers and researchers really concern.
Second, the chairperson who suggested the policy misunderstood the studies conducted by Bronston College. The studies do state that professors in small towns are happier working with their spouse in the same geographic area, but it does not mean that the professors prefer working with the spouses in the same university. Some professors or their spouses may want to work in places different from their partners. These people may want their privacy in terms of their work. Thus, the logic behind the suggestion is not reliable.
Despite the contradictions mentioned above, there is another important error in this argument. While the ultimate purpose of the suggestion is to make Pierce University attractable for the gifted teachers and researchers, the merit of offering employment to the spouses is only applicable for the "new" professors. There is nothing mentioned that is favorable to the gifted professors who are already working in the university. If the suggestion in the letter puts into practice, those talented professors can not benefit from it and may leave the university feeling that they are disrespected by the university.
To sum up, the argument that offering employment to the spouses of new professors would attract gifted teachers and researchers to the university is not well reasoned nor persuasive. The policy would sound better if the argument considered more perspectives as mentioned in the essay.
- The following appeared as part of a column in a popular entertainment magazine. "The producers of the forthcoming movie 3003 will be most likely to maximize their profits if they are willing to pay Robin Good several million dollars to star in it ? even t 50
- The following appeared in a memorandum to the work-group supervisors of the GBS Company:“The CoffeeCart beverage and food service located in the lobby of our main office building is not earning enough insales to cover its costs, and so the cart may disc 62
- The following appeared as part of a column in a popular entertainment magazine. "The producers of the forthcoming movie 3003 will be most likely to maximize their profits if they are willing to pay Robin Good several million dollars to star in it ? even 50
- The following appeared in the editorial section of a corporate newsletter:“The common notion that workers are generally apathetic about management issues is false, or at least outdated: a recently published survey indicates that 79 percent of the nearly 50
- The following appeared in a letter from a department chairperson to the president of Pierce University. "Some studies conducted by Bronston College, which is also located in a small town, reveal that both male and female professors are happier living in s 54
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 236, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ented, but is actually poorly reasoned. The statement is relied on unstated assumpt...
^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ics as shown in the following essay. First, The assumption which the argument...
^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...hers and researchers really concern. Second, the chairperson who suggested th...
^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...hind the suggestion is not reliable. Despite the contradictions mentioned abo...
^^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... are disrespected by the university. To sum up, the argument that offering em...
^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['actually', 'but', 'first', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'really', 'second', 'so', 'thus', 'well', 'while', 'such as', 'to sum up']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.262180974478 0.25644967241 102% => OK
Verbs: 0.141531322506 0.15541462614 91% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0812064965197 0.0836205057962 97% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0440835266821 0.0520304965353 85% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0208816705336 0.0272364105082 77% => OK
Prepositions: 0.118329466357 0.125424944231 94% => OK
Participles: 0.0440835266821 0.0416121511921 106% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.94388970924 2.79052419416 105% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0255220417633 0.026700313972 96% => OK
Particles: 0.00232018561485 0.001811407834 128% => OK
Determiners: 0.146171693735 0.113004496875 129% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0278422273782 0.0255425247493 109% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0116009280742 0.0127820249294 91% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2494.0 2731.13054187 91% => OK
No of words: 392.0 446.07635468 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.36224489796 6.12365571057 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44960558625 4.57801047555 97% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.397959183673 0.378187486979 105% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.308673469388 0.287650121315 107% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.239795918367 0.208842608468 115% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.178571428571 0.135150697306 132% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94388970924 2.79052419416 105% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 207.018472906 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.441326530612 0.469332199767 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 46.5125546212 52.1807786196 89% => OK
How many sentences: 18.0 20.039408867 90% => OK
Sentence length: 21.7777777778 23.2022227129 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.3588191422 57.7814097925 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.555555556 141.986410481 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7777777778 23.2022227129 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.777777777778 0.724660767414 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 3.58251231527 140% => OK
Readability: 52.6451247166 51.9672348444 101% => OK
Elegance: 2.05617977528 1.8405768891 112% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.444928014348 0.441005458295 101% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.154371996762 0.135418324435 114% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0988128471929 0.0829849096947 119% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.625036316361 0.58762219726 106% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.151268607909 0.147661913831 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.208214956581 0.193483328276 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.074647011084 0.0970749176394 77% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.583945337795 0.42659136922 137% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0781634938723 0.0774707102158 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.332049638314 0.312017818177 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0532310902612 0.0698173142475 76% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.33743842365 132% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.87684729064 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.82512315271 41% => OK
Positive topic words: 7.0 6.46551724138 108% => OK
Negative topic words: 3.0 5.36822660099 56% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.82389162562 35% => OK
Total topic words: 11.0 14.657635468 75% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.