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.
The cardinal purpose of education is to enlighten a student, to show the right path & to exhort the best potential out of a student. That being said, it will be a negative attitude to assert that educational institutions should discourage students from stepping into a field of study in which they are less likely to succeed. Instead educational institutions should point out the best potentials in students and let the students decide their field of study.
To begin with, we can take the example of world famous singer Shakira. During her childhood, she had a penchant for music. She applied for a music school and during the entrance assessment of the school, the teachers of the school discouraged her to pursue singing referring her voice as goat like and egregious. But that rejection could not stop her from pursuing her passion for music. At present she has established herself as one of the most popular singer in the world. This instance clearly shows that it is not always righteous to judge the likelihood of success of a student in a particular field. The success of a student in a field depends on the passion and hard work of a student. A mere prediction cannot decide the future of a student.
Albert Einstein once applied for a PhD program in a reputed university in Germany. During the application process, he sent a research proposal. The admission committee rejected the application of Einstein stating his previous track record and his proposal not fitted for a PhD program. They suggested Einstein to pursue a career other than a PhD. But later on Einstein proved himself as one of the greatest scientists of all time and even received Nobel prize. This example clearly shows that educational bodies should try to find out the potential of a student and suggest suitable fields of study rather than discouraging the student from pursuing a field of study.
However, it is also important for educational institutions not to show wrong fields of study to students. For instance, if a student is weak in calculus, then it will not be wise for him to study Quantum Physics. Even if he wants to study Quantum Physics, his chance of failure is more. There lies the responsibility of educational institutions to show him or her right fields leaving the choice to the student.
In sum, every student is unique in some way or the other. Educational institutions are meant to shape the students properly. They should try to recognize the best qualities of students and introduce them to different fields of study suitable for them. Students should be allowed to choose their field of study on their own. It is also noteworthy that the pedagogical institutions should not suggest wrong or not suitable fields for a student. At the same time, it is a fallible idea that educational institutions have the responsibility to discourage students from choosing fields of study in which they are less likely to succeed. Success of a student depends on his or her passion, hard work.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 327, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Instead,
... which they are less likely to succeed. Instead educational institutions should point o...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, so, then, for instance, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 14.8657303371 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 45.0 33.0505617978 136% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 78.0 58.6224719101 133% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 12.9106741573 70% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2500.0 2235.4752809 112% => OK
No of words: 509.0 442.535393258 115% => OK
Chars per words: 4.9115913556 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.74984508646 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77501969956 2.79657885939 99% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 215.323595506 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.442043222004 0.4932671777 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 759.6 704.065955056 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 14.0 6.24550561798 224% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => 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: 28.0 20.2370786517 138% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.0106988415 60.3974514979 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.2857142857 118.986275619 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.1785714286 23.4991977007 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.17857142857 5.21951772744 42% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.83258426966 186% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.248367877299 0.243740707755 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0725578855062 0.0831039109588 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0805577961936 0.0758088955206 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.156548134932 0.150359130593 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0774285476764 0.0667264976115 116% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.8 14.1392134831 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 48.8420337079 126% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.1743820225 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.9 12.1639044944 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.72 8.38706741573 92% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 100.480337079 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.