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

This passage claims that keeping the Grove college all-female will improve morale among students and inspire alumni to keep financially support relying on survey between student and alumni. This reasoning has several flaw and, therefore, is not convincing. The logic of the argument is compromised, because the author fails to mention some important information, uses incorrect analogy in the passage, suggests groundless cause-effect reasoning. First of all, the author claims that keeping the college all-female, therefore, will improve morale among students. When making such a statement, the author assumes that moral can form and support by absent of men. Indeed the author’s argumentation can seem logical at first glance. However, the author fails to consider that moral it is not only about women and men, unmoral, in author’s opinion, situation can happen and between two women. Therefore, the author’s argument is doubtful because it has several flaw in reasoning. If the author had provided more relevant information, his argument would have been more convincing. Second, the argument points out that eighty percent of the students responding to a survey conducted wanted the school to remain all female, and over half of the alumni who answered a survey opposed co-education. Again, this point may seem reasonable and justified to inattentive reader. Nevertheless, a careful analysis reveals a major weakness in the author’s argument. The author relies on unrepresentative statistic. This problem could have been avoided if the author had mention that how many people exactly took part in surveys and their answers in percentage. Finally, the author suggests that keeping the college all-female will convince alumni to keep supporting. However, it may be the case that supporting of alumni depends om many other factors, for example economic situation in country and world. But the author totally ignores to consider such a scenario in the passage. This problem could have been avoided if the author had provided comprehensive analysis of all fact and factors relevant to the matter. In conclusion, the argument contains several logical inconsistencies: relying on a potentially unrepresentative statistical sample, drawing a questionable analogy, omission of important facts. The author’s reasoning, therefore, is doubtful and hardly convincing.