This topic raises the controversial issue of whether college should require students to only take coursers in their specific area of study. Indisputably, students majoring in heavy math-based courses will gain the most when they only focus in that area, since it is not a interdisciplinary major. Nevertheless, there are many other areas of studies that requires a global understanding of many fields in order for a student thrive in their future career. Thus, I generally disagree with the opinion that institutions should require students to take only courses in their field and would argue that they should have a broader education.
First of all, there are many majors that require an interdisciplinary study, even though freshman’s on this areas do not realize right away. To illustrate this, let us look at the example of an International Relations major coursework which they often requires understanding in macroeconomics, languages, communication skills and some understanding of law. In this circumstance, obviously that a student will need to take classes in many different fields to get a complete education in this important area.
Furthermore, if all institutions required that the students should focus only in their areas, oftentimes new students would not understand that they need a holistic view for their career. Specifically, an income student of civil engineering, for instance, that is interested only in structural analysis, would not want to take an ethics class that helps us shape as citizens. Both common sense and personal experience have told us that we do need to have an understanding of many different fields. Hence, all the evidence above demonstrates that it is essential that universities do not require students to only take courses that they are interested.
Admittedly, there are some areas that do gain advantages for only having in their coursework disciplines only related to their specific major. This is true especially when it comes to math or physics. In addition, these areas do require an intense workload in their specific content, and not a broader education like in others. However, the above argument does not constitute a enough claim that the universities should require the students. Because, every area has different needs and it is not their duty to make impositions.
In conclusion, although some areas required deeper understanding only in their field, many others need a holistic view. Hence, taking coursers from many different areas can shape students better for their careers and also to become citizens. Because, universities are also responsible for helping to create a better community for the region.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 271, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...nly focus in that area, since it is not a interdisciplinary major. Nevertheless, ...
^
Line 3, column 109, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...y study, even though freshman's on this areas do not realize right away. To il...
^^^^
Line 3, column 440, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'many'.
Suggestion: many
... a student will need to take classes in many different fields to get a complete education in t...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 476, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'many'.
Suggestion: many
... we do need to have an understanding of many different fields. Hence, all the evidence above d...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 377, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
... the above argument does not constitute a enough claim that the universities shou...
^
Line 9, column 149, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'many'.
Suggestion: many
...istic view. Hence, taking coursers from many different areas can shape students better for the...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, look, nevertheless, so, thus, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 19.5258426966 51% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.4196629213 121% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 19.0 11.3162921348 168% => OK
Pronoun: 48.0 33.0505617978 145% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 48.0 58.6224719101 82% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2265.0 2235.4752809 101% => OK
No of words: 422.0 442.535393258 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.3672985782 5.05705443957 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.53239876712 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.06815307022 2.79657885939 110% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 215.323595506 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.483412322275 0.4932671777 98% => OK
syllable_count: 714.6 704.065955056 101% => 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: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.0779668168 60.3974514979 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.210526316 118.986275619 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2105263158 23.4991977007 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.84210526316 5.21951772744 131% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
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: 0.159831676031 0.243740707755 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0606344534572 0.0831039109588 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0448574334155 0.0758088955206 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.104452426165 0.150359130593 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.033992867978 0.0667264976115 51% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 14.1392134831 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.8420337079 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.1743820225 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.87 12.1639044944 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.47 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 100.480337079 100% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.8971910112 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.