Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
Considering the responsibility of educational institutions to dissuade students from following through the fields of study with least possible to succeed, I am highly inclined to take the side of this statement. Regarding the importance of complementary role of educational institution to bring up the students in conjunction with the strategic plans of society, it is fundamental for all institutions to graduate the successful students in the appropriate demanding majors. To elaborate more on the topic mentioned, the following compelling reasons and examples will be presented.
First and foremost, the definition of the field of study plays a crucial role in the satisfaction of future life of students. Considering the definition of success in the mind of most people, it might be implied as an appropriate job position. It is obvious that selecting the inappropriate fields of study categorically decrease the chance of students to succeed in the future. Thus, the critical role of education institutions to encourage students to the field of study that they are highly likely to succeed becomes crystal clear.
Another primary reason can be denoted as the importance of psychological viewpoints in the future life of students. It is worth noting that there is a causal relationship between the field of study on the one hand and the flourishing of students' potentials on the other hand. For instance, if the students choose the unsuitable field of study, the possibility of using other hidden potentials to success in their study fields reduces remarkably.
Aside from the point I made above, I strongly believe that the students field of study should precisely match with the vital demands of the society. For instance, if the number of physicians in the society are more than it needed, they will likely assign in the unsuccessful positions. As the current social reports reveal, there are numerous country that suffer from the lack of economist despite the powerful educational institutions with the major of economy.
It is also worth nothing that all of my supporting reasons are based on the thorough recognition of educational institution from their students, as well as the integral awareness of society needs. Therefore, the advisers of educational institutions play a complementary role in the success of the students. Needless to say, they are not only should assign to investigate all psychological and physiological characteristics of their student to persuade them pursuing the fields of study with high possible to succeed, but also the incessant supervision of the government and notifying the future needs of society is vital. It goes without saying, any deficiency in these necessities will dramatically challenge my position.
Taking all of these perspectives into account, I cannot agree more about the vital responsibility of educational institutions to dissuade students from following through the fields of study with least possible to succeed regarding the he appropriate job position, psychological viewpoints and demands of society. To my best knowledge, the supporting reasons of this reasons will be skeptical in the absent of effective advisers.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 11, column 232, Rule ID: DT_PRP[1]
Message: Possible typo. Did you mean 'the' or 'he'?
Suggestion: the; he
...ith least possible to succeed regarding the he appropriate job position, psychological...
^^^^^^
Line 11, column 362, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...st knowledge, the supporting reasons of this reasons will be skeptical in the absent...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, regarding, so, therefore, thus, well, for instance, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.4196629213 72% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 32.0 33.0505617978 97% => OK
Preposition: 100.0 58.6224719101 171% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 12.9106741573 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2700.0 2235.4752809 121% => OK
No of words: 498.0 442.535393258 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.42168674699 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.72397222731 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.1747972266 2.79657885939 114% => OK
Unique words: 221.0 215.323595506 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.443775100402 0.4932671777 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 851.4 704.065955056 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 6.24550561798 176% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 23.0359550562 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.2264432386 60.3974514979 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 142.105263158 118.986275619 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.2105263158 23.4991977007 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.42105263158 5.21951772744 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 17.0 10.2758426966 165% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.83258426966 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.240897663356 0.243740707755 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0779978559825 0.0831039109588 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0689102067685 0.0758088955206 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.140070229189 0.150359130593 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0369111038976 0.0667264976115 55% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.2 14.1392134831 122% => 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: 14.45 12.1639044944 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.86 8.38706741573 106% => OK
difficult_words: 124.0 100.480337079 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 11.8971910112 130% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.2143820225 111% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.