133. Some people believe that universities should require every student to take a variety of courses outside the student's field of study. Others believe that universities should not force students to take any courses other than those that will help prepare them for jobs in their chosen fields.
This topic raises the controversial issue of whether universities should require student to take a variety of courses in different fields or not. Indisputably, require students to study in fields that they are not interesting or not helpful for them to prepare jobs is not necessary. Nevertheless, studying in different fields can really broaden one’s horizon. In my opinion, we should all study in multiple fields, which can provide us different thought from different fields. But I don’t think that student should be require by the universities. Thus, I generally disagree with the idea that universities should require students to take a variety of courses, and would argue that student should study more in multiple fields, or the fields that they aren’t familiar.
To begin with, studying multiple fields can provide us different aspect of view toward the same thing. I would like to point out that the point of view of different department can be varied considerably. My personal experience is a compelling example, while I was in junior year of college, I studied in Physics department, and undergo a lot of simulation with coding. Therefore, I have interested in coding and decided to delve into it. Hence, I took some courses under the Computer Science department. While studying in those courses, I found that they using the coding in completely different aspect, they’re trying to optimize those algorithms which already fast enough, without any simulation of reality phenomenon or particle usage. In the circumstance, it’s a perfect example of how a thing can be varied dramatically in different department.
But it’s also worth considering that studying in multiple fields can broaden one’s horizon. Specifically, if we staying in one department for our entire college life, we won’t have the opportunities to learn the knowledge in different fields. For instance, due to I interested in stock, I took some courses in Finance department, in order to learn how to make profit from stock. It really helps me open my eyes, I learned how to examine a company’s financial report, and calculated whether it’s a good timing to buy in or sell. Both common sense and experience have told us that we should studying in multiple fields, which we have interested in. Hence, all the evidence demonstrate that students should studying in as more fields as possible, nevertheless, with students will rather than forcing by universities.
In conclusion, although studying in those none relative fields have none help for jobs, but it’s important that our horizon should be broaden, and we should learn to see thing from different aspect of view. As long as some measurements are performed, or some area involved, we should study in multiple fields. In fact, by our own will, rather than forcing by universities or others.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 520, Rule ID: SHOULD_BE_DO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'required'?
Suggestion: required
...ut I don’t think that student should be require by the universities. Thus, I generally ...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 135, Rule ID: SHOULD_BE_DO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'broadened'?
Suggestion: broadened
...’s important that our horizon should be broaden, and we should learn to see thing from ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, if, nevertheless, really, so, therefore, thus, while, for instance, in conclusion, in fact, of course, in my opinion, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 19.5258426966 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 12.4196629213 161% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 14.8657303371 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.3162921348 124% => OK
Pronoun: 54.0 33.0505617978 163% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 71.0 58.6224719101 121% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 12.9106741573 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2399.0 2235.4752809 107% => OK
No of words: 461.0 442.535393258 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.20390455531 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.63367139033 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90140024565 2.79657885939 104% => OK
Unique words: 215.0 215.323595506 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.466377440347 0.4932671777 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 726.3 704.065955056 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 16.0 6.24550561798 256% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 0.0 4.99550561798 0% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 9.0 1.77640449438 507% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.331243424 60.3974514979 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.045454545 118.986275619 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9545454545 23.4991977007 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.77272727273 5.21951772744 130% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.83258426966 166% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.302726624259 0.243740707755 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0987295001368 0.0831039109588 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.102877019592 0.0758088955206 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.199618438283 0.150359130593 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.115512967607 0.0667264976115 173% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 14.1392134831 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.8420337079 105% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.1743820225 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.88 12.1639044944 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.75 8.38706741573 92% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 100.480337079 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.