Dear Altruists, please review my essay (Argument task)


Fifteen years ago, Omega University implemented a new procedure that encouraged students to evaluate the teaching effectiveness of all their professors. Since that time, Omega professors have begun to assign higher grades in their classes, and overall student grade averages at Omega have risen by 30 percent. Potential employers, looking at this dramatic rise in grades, believe that grades at Omega are inflated and do not accurately reflect student achievement; as a result, Omega graduates have not been as successful at getting jobs as have graduates from nearby Alpha University. To enable its graduates to secure better jobs, Omega University should terminate student evaluation of professors.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

The passage argues that a program of student evaluation of faculty leads to grade inflation, and in turn, a poor employment prospect for student at Omega University. However, upon closer examination, such argument is based on several flawed assumptions unsupported by evidences such as the causal relations between evaluation system and grade inflation, the existence of pernicious grade inflation in the first place, the comparability between Omega and Alpha University. 

Firstly, the author assumes a causal relationship between introduction of student evaluation and grade inflation based on merely temporal sequence of the two events. Yet grade increase may not have anything to do with student evaluation at all. For one, it would be useful to know the evidence regarding the completion rate of student evaluation, if most student like the average student in US colleges do not complete the evaluation rending these evaluation result useless for faculty assessment, then faculty member would have little incentive to please students with these evaluation. Moreover, it would be useful to know if the evaluation tend to be filled before or after the grade was assigned; if the grade is always assigned after the evaluation form deadline, then the argument's causal assumption would be seriously weakened. On the contrary if there are professors at Omega university who admit that they assigned better grade due to the student's power of evaluation, then the argument would be strengthened. 

In addition, the author assumes that the 30 percent grade increase is a result of pernicious grade inflation without citing any evidence. A grade increase could be a accurate reflection of student competence caused by the entry of a exceptional cohort of new students or better teaching method caused by the evaluation system. If there is evidence such as a third party tests of Omega students revealing a real improvement in student's academic performance, then the premise of the argument and recommendation would be undermined. On the other hand, if the third party assessment of student performance suggests no improvement of Omega students, then assumption regarding grade inflation and the argument as a whole would be strengthened.

Furthermore, the analogy between Omega and Alpha Universities is not necessarily justified. It would be important for the author to supply evidence establishing the comparability between the two universities. If Alpha university leans heavily towards training in STEM subjects such as engineering and mathematics that are highly in demand in the current job market; then Alpha students would enjoy a better career prospect, regardless of issues of grade inflation at Omega university. However, i the author can provide evidences suggesting the two university provide similar course in similar fields and enjoy a comparable level of employment prior to the introduction of student evaluation at Omega and subsequent grade increase, then the argument would significantly strengthened. Moreover, the author might also provide evidence regarding grade data at Alpha university, It might be the case that in order to improvement the chance of employment of their students, Universities across the country are all inflating their grade, and grade inflation would have little to do with the poor career prospect of Omega students.

Lastly, the author assumes that the student evaluation is the chief cause of grade inflation and the discontinuation of student evaluation as the only cause of action without presenting evidence regarding the relative benefit of alternative solutions. One might think of other possible approach to solve the problem, such as switch to a percentile ranking score system that cannot be inflated which might be even more effective than cancel the student evaluation program. Therefore, the author should provide evidence assessing alternative cause of action, as well as their relative cost and advantages compared with the proposed cancellation of student evaluation system.

In conclusion, the author presented an argument linking the introduction of student evaluation system to the a rise of average grade at Omega University, and, in turn, the poor career prospect of Omega students. Yet, upon closer examination, each step of author's causal inference suffers from flawed assumptions unsupported by evidences. There is a need for evidence to establish the causal relations between student evaluation and grade increase, the comparability between Omega and Alpha university, and the relative advantage of alternative solution other than discontinuation of student evaluation scheme.