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.//
Education is an important factor in the development of any nation. But it is also necessary to harness the knowledge gained by education into definite direction which can lead to progress. Educational institutions have the responsilibity to enhance the future of it's students and to make sure that a student is provided with appropriate work in order to sustain his/herself. While encouraging students to pursue careers which have copious job opportunities may prove beneficial upto a certain extent, employing this policy can also have other harmful consequences, which is why I am not fully in support of this policy.
While getting a job and earning money is very important, freedom of choice and independence can not be neglected. Students must not be discouraged to pursue the fields of their interest. Sometimes there is parental pressure on students to get a job and start earning money. If educational institutions start employing the same policy then it will further excerbate the burden on a student. A student should be apprised of every field of work, be it industry, scientific research, management, arts etc. and then be allowed to choose a career based on his/her preferences. Meanwhile, it is also necessary to adress to the students regarding the future scope and consequences of adopting a particular field of study. This way, a student will be properly informed about each and every field and then can make an astute decision. For some students, wealth and luxury is an important factor, and this policy works well for these students, but for other students, pursuit of arts and science without much concern of money is of great significance, and hence encouraging them to pursue fields with guaranteed and high paying jobs is not a viable option.
Another reason why this policy may not prove to be effective is that many students are already inclined towards making a career where they are guaranteed with monetary return and benefits. Most of the students choose their universities based on the placement statistics and future scope for employment. In technical institutions, majority of the students opt for high paying jobs, while only a few opt for further studies such as Masters and PhD where the jobs are scanty. Very few students choose a career purely driven by interest, such as arts and science. Which is why this policy will not bring a drastic change in the current trends regarding job acquisition mentality, which is already prevalent. But it will affect students who are determined to pursue a career with less financial output.
In conclusion, instead of diverting students to fields which have plentiful job opportunities, educational institutions should respect an individual's freedom and must encourage them to pursue a career of their interest, meanwhile enlightening them with the pros and cons of every field. This way, students can make a well informed decision which they will not regret later on in their life.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 275, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” 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.
...s to get a job and start earning money. If educational institutions start employin...
^^
Line 13, column 139, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'individuals'' or 'individual's'?
Suggestion: individuals'; individual's
...cational institutions should respect an individuals freedom and must encourage them to purs...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, if, may, regarding, so, then, well, while, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.5258426966 123% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 14.8657303371 148% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 33.0505617978 91% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 58.6224719101 97% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2490.0 2235.4752809 111% => OK
No of words: 483.0 442.535393258 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15527950311 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68799114503 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87571155725 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 228.0 215.323595506 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.472049689441 0.4932671777 96% => OK
syllable_count: 774.0 704.065955056 110% => 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: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.77640449438 338% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 68.5191268793 60.3974514979 113% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.571428571 118.986275619 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0 23.4991977007 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.95238095238 5.21951772744 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.267611589081 0.243740707755 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0844326906284 0.0831039109588 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0411511673472 0.0758088955206 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.184625309445 0.150359130593 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0205611665618 0.0667264976115 31% => 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: 14.4 14.1392134831 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.8420337079 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.1639044944 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.67 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 119.0 100.480337079 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 11.8971910112 130% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => 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: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.