Educational institutions should actively encourage their students to choose fields of study in which jobs are plentiful.
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.
When it comes down to whether or not academic institutions should encourage people to study in specific fields there are a series of factors to be considered. While people should be allowed to study whatever subject they choose to, that doesn't mean that the university for instance, shouldn't encourage people into certain fields. I would say in general educational institutions should encourage people into fields that most need people. Since the purpose of education is to help people prepare for the future, encouraging but not forcing them into the most job abundant fields should be done.
When it comes to education, the purpose is to enable one to succeed after it's completion. Whether that be in a trade where one is taught the skills required for the job. Or even elementary school where learning to read will help one in life. One of the most effective way's to help one succeed is to put them on the right path. Say for instance a person isn't sure what to major in for university and are stuck between two majors. Let's say interpretive dance and computer graphics. It would be beneficial for the kids to be directed into a more lucrative direction with say computer graphics. Younger people do not know what will help them later in life, nor do they normally plan that far ahead. Thus to cajole people along the right path will make them more likely to be successful.
More over another aspect to consider is the success of society as a whole. The reason jobs tend to be abundent in a field is because they are in demand. Society has a dearth of people in those fields and needs them filled. Educational institutions can help to alleviate that dearth, by encouraging people into those fields. For instance if there is an abundent amount of jobs within welding that would imply there aren't enough people in welding to fill the jobs. By educational institutions encouraging people to go into fields requiring more people they are more optimially distributing resources. In words of Thomas Sowell "scarce resources with alternative uses" is what always should be considered in distribution. People are a scarce resource and there is always an opportunity cost of them being wrongly distributed. The market is wonderful way of determining where people are most needed. People going into already saturated fields not only hurts them, but hurts all of society. Thus I would say that it is preferable to encourage people into fields that have more jobs.
When it comes down to it, it is pragmatic and thus preferable to encourage people into fields with higher demand. Educational institutions should thus do this because that is both their purpose, and the optimal for all of society. Though it should be said there are some open questions with this. While it is wise to encourage people into more amp employment opportunities, the future prospects of those fields needs to be considered. People should not be encouraged into fields that are in demand now, but will have abundant opportunities in the future. One could if too much people were encouraged into a field over saturate it, hurting people. Now while, it is sometimes difficult to ascertain which areas will be still wanting in the future, I would still say, 'it's better than nothing'.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 238, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...y whatever subject they choose to, that doesnt mean that the university for instance, ...
^^^^^^
Line 1, column 284, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: shouldn't
... mean that the university for instance, shouldnt encourage people into certain fields. I...
^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 353, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...e right path. Say for instance a person isnt sure what to major in for university an...
^^^^
Line 2, column 429, Rule ID: LETS_LET[1]
Message: Did you mean 'Let's'?
Suggestion: Let's
...rsity and are stuck between two majors. Lets say interpretive dance and computer gra...
^^^^
Line 2, column 695, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...r do they normally plan that far ahead. Thus to cajole people along the right path w...
^^^^
Line 3, column 414, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: aren't
...s within welding that would imply there arent enough people in welding to fill the jo...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 996, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...y hurts them, but hurts all of society. Thus I would say that it is preferable to en...
^^^^
Line 4, column 231, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Though” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...se, and the optimal for all of society. Though it should be said there are some open q...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 572, Rule ID: MUCH_COUNTABLE[1]
Message: Use 'many' with countable nouns.
Suggestion: many
...unities in the future. One could if too much people were encouraged into a field ove...
^^^^
Line 4, column 714, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...difficult to ascertain which areas will be still wanting in the future, I would still say, its b...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, so, still, thus, well, while, for instance, in general
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 38.0 19.5258426966 195% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 12.4196629213 169% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 11.3162921348 159% => OK
Pronoun: 44.0 33.0505617978 133% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 82.0 58.6224719101 140% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 12.9106741573 70% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2707.0 2235.4752809 121% => OK
No of words: 553.0 442.535393258 125% => OK
Chars per words: 4.89511754069 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.84932490483 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64356091987 2.79657885939 95% => OK
Unique words: 246.0 215.323595506 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.444846292948 0.4932671777 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 862.2 704.065955056 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.10617977528 225% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 31.0 20.2370786517 153% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 29.6054527137 60.3974514979 49% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 87.3225806452 118.986275619 73% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.8387096774 23.4991977007 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.03225806452 5.21951772744 39% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 10.0 7.80617977528 128% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 21.0 10.2758426966 204% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.14059868347 0.243740707755 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0473219972361 0.0831039109588 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0437387481821 0.0758088955206 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.10719724988 0.150359130593 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.053867090675 0.0667264976115 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.6 14.1392134831 75% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.8420337079 111% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.84 12.1639044944 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.42 8.38706741573 88% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 100.480337079 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => 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.