In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution without first being strongly influenced by past achievements within that field.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
It is argued that in the development of any field, past progresses would inevitably influence any possible future breakthrough. I think this rule holds true in certain fields such as academia. However, in most of the subjects or professions, significant innovation can be reached with no prerequisite. Let us first start from the case of academic development. As a rule, the significancy of a study is partly determined by how well the author addresses challenges that previous literatures fail to tackle or phenomenon that still remains unexplained in preceding research. The indispensable role of literature review in any academic paper also demonstrates that, to base your discovery or theory on existing progresses is a norm to be followed by any member in the scholar community. For example, one can easily point out the failure of many economists in predicting the trends of housing prices. However, if not first familiarize himself to the assumption behind economic theory, for instance, the assumption that every market participant acts rationally, any attempt to join the discussion and even make contribution would be inefficient and even a waste of time. Therefore, in certain field, contribution evolves principally from a comprehensive and trenchant understanding of the past progresses.
However, in most of the fields, the past can sometimes stagnate, if not harm, the innovation. With a long history, any field would become not a racing ground for progresses, but a system that ensure the interests of the stakeholders. Therefore, if strongly influenced by past progresses, some conventions can do no good to, or even detrimental to any future breakthrough. This is why we always hear the story of success from those who quit their job from giant corporation and start their own company, since a brand new start always brings a new mindset unleashing from the path rooted in the past.
Admittedly, past will always leave its trace on the development of any things, willingly or unwillingly. But it is depending on the individual to decide the extent to which the past influence the future. For example, every teacher was once a student, who had witnessed how their teachers in the past design curriculum and treat students. Nevertheless, they had best not to copy paste the teaching strategies decades of year ago. Good teachers adapt their strategies constantly as students changes, teaching resources being updated, and education philosophies keep evolving.
In conclusion, in field such as academia, strong influences from the past guarantee that every scholar is at the same ground and within the same discourse, thus improve efficiency of communication. It is widely supported, however, that one can make great contribution to a field even if impact from the past is absent. Furthermore, we should intentionally preclude any potential harm derived from the rooted convention in the past and unleash the power of innovation and imagination.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 320, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...eached with no prerequisite. Let us first start from the case of acad...
^^
Line 9, column 113, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...hings, willingly or unwillingly. But it is depending on the individual to decide the extent ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, nevertheless, so, still, therefore, thus, well, for example, for instance, i think, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.5258426966 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 14.8657303371 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 33.0505617978 79% => OK
Preposition: 73.0 58.6224719101 125% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 12.9106741573 147% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2538.0 2235.4752809 114% => OK
No of words: 469.0 442.535393258 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.41151385928 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65364457471 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.47851189562 2.79657885939 124% => OK
Unique words: 260.0 215.323595506 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.554371002132 0.4932671777 112% => OK
syllable_count: 777.6 704.065955056 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 10.0 4.38483146067 228% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 23.0359550562 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.5725258213 60.3974514979 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 141.0 118.986275619 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.0555555556 23.4991977007 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.33333333333 5.21951772744 160% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.233902015068 0.243740707755 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.074643327081 0.0831039109588 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0511461637476 0.0758088955206 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.135835509852 0.150359130593 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.037512762247 0.0667264976115 56% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.1 14.1392134831 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.63 48.8420337079 75% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.1743820225 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.39 12.1639044944 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.4 8.38706741573 112% => OK
difficult_words: 133.0 100.480337079 132% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 17.0 11.8971910112 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.2143820225 111% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 11.7820224719 144% => 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: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.