In order for surviving in the combative and competitive modern world, basic knowledge in a myriads of important aspects is more essential than subjective expertise. The matter presented by the students of the Classen University to the school’s administration complains about the burdensome breadth of the curriculum. They land on the conclusion that: generalized rather than subject-oriented curriculum requirement is the only reason for the substantial decline in the placement rates in Classen University, when juxtaposed with many of the top-ranked schools. The aforementioned assumption does not hold water due to a number of valid reasons.
Firstly, the blame on the course curriculum is an assumption of students without proper detailed understanding of the other factors. It is not mentioned about the methods adapted by students to land on the conclusion, which they mention as the only plausible cause of steep fall in placements. Employers look for potential candidates who not only have subjective expertise, but are also adaptive and willing to take up challenges. In most of the companies, it is a common scenario that employees have to take up roles which are novice and learn new technologies by themselves, as the technology or indeed the world itself is constantly changing. The managers and CEOs of the companies are often employees who started their journey in the technical field and later on moved to managerial field which was not the part of their course curriculum. A terse and focused subjective curriculum will force the individuals to stay in the same field, such that if the field becomes obsolete the individuals will struggle to find a new opportunity.
In addition to the above reasons, a number of other factors regarding the university has to be considered. The overall fame of the university compared to other institutions, the prudence of instructors in the university, infrastructure such as laboratory facilities for establishing practical skills, etc. play integral part in carving the students and attracting the giant companies. The correlation of university with the global leader companies is cardinal.
However, a focused subjective choice of course curriculum will indulge a profound knowledge in students and provide them with more time to be erudite in the field of their interest. But the positive facets of a narrow syllabus do not outshine the adverse aspects of it. As a result of which, rather than drastically cutting back on its breadth requirements, the university has to carefully consider all the other factors which could possibly improve placement rates. A cogent study on the matter is substantial before taking a very important decision like changing the entire curriculum which will have a huge impact.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 90, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a myriad' or simply 'myriads'?
Suggestion: a myriad; myriads
...titive modern world, basic knowledge in a myriads of important aspects is more essential ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 306, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Play
...for establishing practical skills, etc. play integral part in carving the students a...
^^^^
Line 4, column 72, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[4]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'profound knowledge'.
Suggestion: profound knowledge
...hoice of course curriculum will indulge a profound knowledge in students and provide them with more ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 427, Rule ID: MAY_COULD_POSSIBLY[1]
Message: Use simply 'could'.
Suggestion: could
...ly consider all the other factors which could possibly improve placement rates. A cogent study...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, look, regarding, so, as to, in addition, of course, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.4196629213 40% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 33.0505617978 45% => OK
Preposition: 67.0 58.6224719101 114% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2332.0 2235.4752809 104% => OK
No of words: 437.0 442.535393258 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.33638443936 5.05705443957 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.57214883401 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.11837608124 2.79657885939 112% => OK
Unique words: 229.0 215.323595506 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.524027459954 0.4932671777 106% => OK
syllable_count: 743.4 704.065955056 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 12.0 4.99550561798 240% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.4494691579 60.3974514979 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.555555556 118.986275619 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.2777777778 23.4991977007 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.22222222222 5.21951772744 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.147699126059 0.243740707755 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0498916577695 0.0831039109588 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0721476983404 0.0758088955206 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.09567958072 0.150359130593 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0467998285038 0.0667264976115 70% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 14.1392134831 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.8420337079 79% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.99 12.1639044944 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.27 8.38706741573 111% => OK
difficult_words: 123.0 100.480337079 122% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => 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.