"We'll explain to them it's not just about producing a written paper," Herlocker said. "It's about learning how to research, how to identify scholarly versus non-scholarly sources."

As far as the quality of the paper Walter wrote, Herlocker said a Valencia staff member who reviewed it would give it an A.

She even joked that he should work as a tutor for students, instead of making money by writing the paper for them.

A retired UCF professor who taught upper-level public relations classes also reviewed the paper for Local 6.

"First, the paper is adequately researched and presented," Frank Stansberry said. "Its organization is acceptable -- orderly and building to a conclusion."

He had concerns about how the paper was written in "isolation" as if funding could be increased without cutting something else or raising taxes.

"If I were a member of the target audience, I'd want to know whose money should I reduce to fund this, or whom should I tax to raise additional resources," Stansberry said.

Stansberry was critical of how the paper was written, pointing out how long paragraphs that stretched nearly a page made it "hard to read." He also thought the citations were not specific enough if a reader wanted to check them or find additional material.

The best he would give it is a B- if he were grading it.