Colleges and universities should require all faculty to spend time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach.
While class="it">it class="is">is understandable for colleges to require their faculties to class="take">take their class="time">time working outside class="academia">academia in professions relevant to their specialties accordingly, class="it">it class="is">is class="nontheless">nontheless dispensable due to the different nature and conditions class="across">across discrete disciplines.
Indeed, class="it">it class="is">is presumably valuable for professors of certain class="field">field to gain employment experience out of academic world in terms of improving their ability to provide better education to students. For example, an accounting class="professor">professor lecturing auditing in universities class="would">would undoubtedlly be able to offer amusing instances class="if">if he/she was once employed by one of the class="big">big fours, which prestigously lead the trends of the accounting industry. More importantly, instead of vacuous instructions of the how-tos, he/she class="would">would be capable of explaining the intrinsic relationships class="across">across the stakeholders in an engagement of class="audit">audit, therefore cultivate students with precious qualifications beyond the textbooks.
However, I consider the mandatory requirement doubtful since class="it">it class="is">is hard to evaluate and apply in real-world scenarios thanks to the recondite nature and multiple factors involved in this process.
First and foremost, spending class="time">time on employments outside class="academia">academia deprives the class="time">time class="that">that class="could">could class="have">have class="been">been class="paid">paid class="into">into researching in laboratories. Especially true in some disciplines class="where">where cutting-edge class="research">research yields significant outcome class="that">that class="could">could predominate class="where">where the whole industry class="is">is going. Giving considerations of a math class="professor">professor who class="could">could class="have">have class="been">been doing class="research">research in his/her lab and possibly achieve major break-throughs in the class="field">field. What class="if">if they are required by the institution to class="take">take their class="time">time with jobs outside class="academia">academia and were hired by an insurance company class="where">where supposedly they get class="paid">paid performing actuarial services. There class="is">is certainly nothing wrong with class="that">that class="job">job, class="nontheless">nontheless class="it">it cuts the chances class="that">that one class="could">could class="have">have achieved something class="big">big and won a Noble Prize.
To make things worse, class="it">it class="is">is not always helpful for an instructor in college to enhance their teaching by employing class="such">such policy. An English literature teacher, for example, class="would">would reckon class="it">it absurd class="if">if he/she was unconditionally impulsed class="into">into doing something other than teaching. Not only does class="it">it class="do">do no good on their performance in class, class="it">it class="could">could also be against the personally purpose to class="do">do so. In class="such">such cases, this policy will seriously harm the education quality of the instituions, for the primary purpose of them should be to provide qualified education by certified faculties.
In conclusion, although class="it">it sometimes folsters the class
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 31, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'classes'?
Suggestion: classes
While class='it'>it class='is'>is understandable for co...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 309, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'classes'?
Suggestion: classes
...es accordingly, class='it'>it class='is'>is class='nontheles...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 33, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'classes'?
Suggestion: classes
...s. Indeed, class='it'>it class='is'>is presumably valuable f...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 86, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'classes'?
Suggestion: classes
... doubtful since class='it'>it class='is'>is hard to evaluate and ...
^^^^^
Line 13, column 1619, Rule ID: NOBLE_PRIZE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'Nobel Prize'?
Suggestion: Nobel Prize
...ing class='big'>big and won a Noble Prize. To make things worse, class=&apos...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 17, column 47, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'classes'?
Suggestion: classes
...e things worse, class='it'>it class='is'>is not always helpful fo...
^^^^^
Line 17, column 469, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'classes'?
Suggestion: classes
.... Not only does class='it'>it class='do'>do no good on their perf...
^^^^^
Line 17, column 556, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'classes'?
Suggestion: classes
...mance in class, class='it'>it class='could'>could also be against...
^^^^^
Line 21, column 77, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...it'>it sometimes folsters the class
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, first, however, if, so, therefore, while, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 35.0 33.0505617978 106% => OK
Preposition: 61.0 58.6224719101 104% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3868.0 2235.4752809 173% => OK
No of words: 393.0 442.535393258 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 9.84223918575 5.05705443957 195% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45244063426 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 8.97119540104 2.79657885939 321% => Word_Length_SD is high.
Unique words: 240.0 215.323595506 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.610687022901 0.4932671777 124% => OK
syllable_count: 1083.6 704.065955056 154% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 2.8 1.59117977528 176% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.2370786517 74% => 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: 26.0 23.0359550562 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 90.1514774637 60.3974514979 149% => OK
Chars per sentence: 257.866666667 118.986275619 217% => Less chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 26.2 23.4991977007 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.8 5.21951772744 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 7.80617977528 115% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => 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: 0.0251030818457 0.243740707755 10% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0172278324022 0.0831039109588 21% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0185002637976 0.0758088955206 24% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0224761461657 0.150359130593 15% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0180757207175 0.0667264976115 27% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 38.0 14.1392134831 269% => Automated_readability_index is high.
flesch_reading_ease: -56.43 48.8420337079 -116% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 17.1 7.92365168539 216% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 27.6 12.1743820225 227% => Flesch kincaid grade is high.
coleman_liau_index: 40.09 12.1639044944 330% => Coleman_liau_index is high.
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.91 8.38706741573 130% => OK
difficult_words: 149.0 100.480337079 148% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 26.0 11.8971910112 219% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.2143820225 111% => OK
text_standard: 28.0 11.7820224719 238% => The average readability is very high. Good job!
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.