The proposed change to curriculum is that, the future will be dominated by technology, hence making computer programming mandatory for the students will help them get high paying jobs in the field of computer programming or data science and even those who pursue other careers will benefit from programming. This notion is while considering its student's careers is flawed for numerous reasons.
Firstly, schools are the first step in acquiring the skills to explore their passion and identify their own career choices. The notion proposed by the school assumes that there exists a direct correlation between computer programming and adapting to technology. Technology existing in all fields, merely exists to augment the current field to produce more accurate and better results thus optimizing its current workflow or pushing into newer boundaries. Computer programming is merely one of many skills that technology primarily relies and knowing this is irrelevant, as technology does not seek to alter current industries into adapting techniques that only those with computer programming skills can understand and use effectively.
Secondly, people that attend wish to attend universities do to better arm themselves to pursue their passions and interest and the choice of identifying that computer programming is required is entirely upon them and the school has no rights in forcing them to learn something that they find irrelevant. Even if, in the future, they realize that they do need that skill - it is easy to acquire it as computer programming is essentially like learning a language, one can pursue this line of education anytime in their lives and more freely now than ever, thanks to the internet.
Furthermore, the job market is volatile in nature, there is no way of pinpointing a rising and declining trend on which skills are actively seeked by the employers. Many people graduating from school do not actively enter the work force immediately as they may wish to pursue higher education better equipping them for their career choices. Hence, whatever computer programming skills they acquired at school may prove to be inconsequential for students who did not need to study the same subject in college as times change and better and more advanced programming languages may replace the ones they have learnt.
The argument also states that "Even if they pursue other careers, programming will still benefit them, given that all industries are becoming more technological" while this is true, computer programming is a skill used by software engineers and data scientists to design and develop products and materials required for the other industries; implying that those who in other industries which are dependent on technology but not computer programming only need to be capable of using these derived products to augment themselves and have no use for computer programming.
In summary, the argument proposing a change in cirriculum does not prove to be beneficial to students pursuing other careers and it assumes that though graduating school directly enter the active workforce which will use computer programming. It also assumes that the job market will always have a demand for software engineers and data scientists, which is fallacious.
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 7 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 8 2
No. of Sentences: 15 15
No. of Words: 516 350
No. of Characters: 2708 1500
No. of Different Words: 238 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.766 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.248 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.728 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 216 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 157 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 119 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 70 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 34.4 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 16.946 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.8 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.351 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.642 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.114 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, furthermore, hence, if, may, second, secondly, so, still, thus, while, in summary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 11.1786427146 197% => OK
Relative clauses : 21.0 13.6137724551 154% => OK
Pronoun: 47.0 28.8173652695 163% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 53.0 55.5748502994 95% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 16.3942115768 49% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2773.0 2260.96107784 123% => OK
No of words: 516.0 441.139720559 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37403100775 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.76609204519 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85002566203 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 242.0 204.123752495 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.468992248062 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 855.0 705.55239521 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 36.0 22.8473053892 158% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 119.10242548 57.8364921388 206% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 198.071428571 119.503703932 166% => OK
Words per sentence: 36.8571428571 23.324526521 158% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.71428571429 5.70786347227 135% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 6.88822355289 15% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.249528082271 0.218282227539 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0908742997281 0.0743258471296 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0718526718866 0.0701772020484 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.143848174848 0.128457276422 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0663947294147 0.0628817314937 106% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 22.3 14.3799401198 155% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 26.48 48.3550499002 55% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 18.5 12.197005988 152% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.46 12.5979740519 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.25 8.32208582834 111% => OK
difficult_words: 125.0 98.500998004 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 16.4 11.1389221557 147% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.