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.
Education includes various fields from general knowledge such as math and English to more specified subjects which are perhaps strongly related to one’s future job. Some argue that teachers are those for aiding students to focus on developing their talented abilities while reducing wasted efforts on relatively less talented fields. However, this idea seems to be drawn by the misconception of education’s fundamental roles and talented students.
Firstly, educational institutions are where providing opportunities for students to access various fields and enjoy them rather than concentrating on one’s great possibility of success. There are lots of students who are playing the piano, but not everyone is talented enough to become a professional pianist. Although many of them acknowledge the fact, they still go to an academy, pay money, and keep learning how to play the piano. They are not like wasting one’s time or money, but just playing it as a hobby. Everyone has their freedom to select a hobby, and whether one has a great talent for a certain area does not a big deal. Therefore, in spite of the students do not show enough possibility to success, there is no reason to prevent them from doing it - they can simply enjoy it as a hobby.
Secondly, there are only vague clues to determine whether students are gifted in certain fields. Everyone has a different speed in acquiring something, and it can be accelerated or decelerated during the steps of learning. For example, there can be two types of students in Spanish class. One is those who have a great ability to learn new expressions; the other is those with a better ability to apply grammatical rules even for complicated sentences. At the beginning of class, a teacher might judge the first group as talented in learning a language. However, as the sentences get complicated to simply memorize, the second group will start showing a better performance. If a teacher judged the second group as less talented at the beginning of class and dissuaded them from learning Spanish, it would be impossible to discover their great learning language ability in a different aspect.
Concentrating on a certain talented area might increase the possibility of being successful, so one might insist as the given assertion. However, it deviates from educational institutions’ fundamental roles: assisting students to experience various fields. Furthermore, no one can perfectly judge one’s ability with its complicated nature. Therefore, preventing students from spending time on their less talented areas is improper.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, while, for example, such as, in spite of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.4196629213 72% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 11.3162921348 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 33.0505617978 70% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 58.6224719101 84% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 12.9106741573 39% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2182.0 2235.4752809 98% => OK
No of words: 414.0 442.535393258 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.27053140097 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.51076378781 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92220117195 2.79657885939 104% => OK
Unique words: 217.0 215.323595506 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.524154589372 0.4932671777 106% => OK
syllable_count: 683.1 704.065955056 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.0632368566 60.3974514979 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.1 118.986275619 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7 23.4991977007 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.35 5.21951772744 122% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 10.2758426966 156% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.111635425275 0.243740707755 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0350465972908 0.0831039109588 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0339777458651 0.0758088955206 45% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.074193724048 0.150359130593 49% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0240100285489 0.0667264976115 36% => 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: 13.7 14.1392134831 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.8420337079 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.1639044944 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.44 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 100.480337079 100% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 11.8971910112 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => 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: 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.