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.
As history has proved, the job market is dynamic and ever-changing. As such, demands for jobs in different fields are transient and vary depending on the social and economic climate at the time. Thus, educational institutes should focus their energy on encouraging students to reach their optimal performance in the field of their choice, as opposed to choosing a field with a plethora of jobs for two reasons.
Firstly, the job market is not stagnant, meaning that the availability of jobs changes constantly. For example, due to the influx of technology and its necessity in society as of recently, jobs related to computer engineering and data science have increased dramatically. Students majoring in computer science are much more easily able to find internships at start-ups, Facebook, Google, and Amazon than students majoring in healthcare are able to find internships in their respective field. However, this was not the case 20 years ago, during the inchoate phases of technology. Taking this into account, it is not feasible for educational institutes to persuade students to choose a field of study based on job availability, since there is no guarantee that these jobs will still remain in high demand after a couple years. By doing so, educational institutes may be setting their students up for limited chances of success, and students may be forced to reconsider their choices a couple years down the line.
Secondly, research has repeatedly shown that passion positively correlates to performance. Students are not always interested in the fields with high job rates, and tend to produce lesser quality work than their peers, who may be interested in the field. Take for example, a student who majored in computer science because a counselor suggested it would lead to better job opportunities, as opposed to a student who majored in computer science after being involved in a multitude of extra curriculars related to computer science. Chances of the latter student achieving success are much higher than the prior, due to their passion for the field. Educational institutes should take into account the factors that lead to high performance and the future success of their students when motivating them to choose a field of study, since personal preferences play a large role in how likely one is to continuously pursue and excel in a field.
Although proponents of this statement may claim that the role of educational institutes is to set their students up for financial stability and success in the future, simply pursuing financial success is not sufficient enough to attain it. Self motivation plays a large role in individual success, and educational institutes can only prepare students for so much. This inner motivation can only push students further if they truly care for their field and their role in said field. Thus, educational institutes should encourage their students to "follow their dreams" as opposed to "follow the money."
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 567, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...years ago, during the inchoate phases of technology. Taking this into account, it...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, still, thus, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 33.0505617978 91% => OK
Preposition: 71.0 58.6224719101 121% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2516.0 2235.4752809 113% => OK
No of words: 479.0 442.535393258 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25260960334 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67825486995 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88943728985 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 231.0 215.323595506 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.482254697286 0.4932671777 98% => OK
syllable_count: 783.9 704.065955056 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 3.10617977528 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 23.0359550562 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.5899558659 60.3974514979 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 139.777777778 118.986275619 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.6111111111 23.4991977007 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.44444444444 5.21951772744 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => 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: 0.270416634967 0.243740707755 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0940132611517 0.0831039109588 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0582770552893 0.0758088955206 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.192323627108 0.150359130593 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0203299247129 0.0667264976115 30% => 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: 16.6 14.1392134831 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 48.8420337079 92% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.1743820225 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.47 12.1639044944 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.91 8.38706741573 106% => OK
difficult_words: 121.0 100.480337079 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.2143820225 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => 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.