Colleges and universities should require all faculty to spend time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach.
Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy and explain how these consequences shape your position.
Unlike centuries ago, when most science and technology development is directly inspired by the difficulty or confusing phenomena in the real life, with the division of labor, the academic world has an increasingly widened gap with real world. Most science disciplines have developed its own research modes and methodologies. In such context, the problem whether scientists should reestablish the connection with the real world is a meaningful and thought-provoking issue. In my perspective, the policy simply to require all faculties to spend time outside the academy has its advantages and disadvantages. Nevertheless, another version of the policy could better serve our purposes.
Communication with real world outside academy could help faculties reasearch and teach. For one thing, many disciplines, especially applied science research such as architecture and chemistry has its value only when the research outcome could be put into practice in real life. Such contact would be conducive to the application of their research and guiding professors to realize the needs of the market. Without such access to the real world, academic researcher may be indulged in their ivory tower and hardly make any contribution to the manufacturing. For instance, a new theoretical chemical material synthesis method has to be tested in the real life manufacture process to be fully evaluated. The time working in factories could help researchers understand the costs and profits of the method, thus contributing to future research. For another, the quality of teaching could be enhanced by the communication. Students are insterested in the situation and job opportunities in the market to better make relevant career decision. Such contact would help professors to talk about not only knowledge in the textbook, but also stories and facts in the career.
Though communication could help faculties a lot, in certain circumstances, it may engender unwelcomed consequences. First, some disciplines are intrinsically theoretical, such as mathematics and theoretical physics. They have little association with job markets, or their outcome contributes most only to the academic world. For such subjects, it would a waste of time to require professors to spend time outside the academy, which could detract them and interfere with their research program. On the contrary, they should concentrate only on the academic study. Second, it is the right of professors and faculty members to decide their own research. Their persuing for the truth and research plan should be respected accoding to the independence of science. Thus the colleges does not have the legitimacy to force them to work outside the academic world. It may diminish the morale of the professors and worse the relationship between institutions and faculties.
To sum up, based on the discussion above, the influence of the policy has its boons and banes. We cannot easily judge which side is dominant. However, should a weaker version of the policy be implemented, we could avoid most of the adverse impact and keep most of positive effect. Say, colleges and universities encourage faculties to spend time outside academy to better understand the situation of the market and facilitate the process. Thus, all the faculties still have their own rights to make decisions. For applied disciplines, they could easily find a relevant occuapancy to realize the constraints in real life and take those facts into account when turning back to research. For theorectical subjects, the professor could well continue their research without unnecessary interuption.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 760, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...ccoding to the independence of science. Thus the colleges does not have the legitima...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, nevertheless, second, so, still, thus, well, as to, for instance, in fact, such as, for one thing, on the contrary, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 12.4196629213 169% => OK
Conjunction : 25.0 14.8657303371 168% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 11.3162921348 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 33.0505617978 79% => OK
Preposition: 76.0 58.6224719101 130% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 12.9106741573 139% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3057.0 2235.4752809 137% => OK
No of words: 559.0 442.535393258 126% => OK
Chars per words: 5.4686940966 5.05705443957 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.86242540663 4.55969084622 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04533227451 2.79657885939 109% => OK
Unique words: 270.0 215.323595506 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.483005366726 0.4932671777 98% => OK
syllable_count: 943.2 704.065955056 134% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.740449438202 135% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 30.0 20.2370786517 148% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.7502419897 60.3974514979 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.9 118.986275619 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.6333333333 23.4991977007 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.36666666667 5.21951772744 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 12.0 4.83258426966 248% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.20768519497 0.243740707755 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0591057591047 0.0831039109588 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0532305239033 0.0758088955206 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.144088816156 0.150359130593 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0432597422877 0.0667264976115 65% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 14.1392134831 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 48.8420337079 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.45 12.1639044944 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.94 8.38706741573 107% => OK
difficult_words: 156.0 100.480337079 155% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 11.8971910112 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => 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: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.