Educational institutions should dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed.
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.
Electing field in secondary school and the university has always been in hot debate among students, parents, teachers, and experts. While some claim students should select a field that could find a job in the future, others maintain students' interests are more important for the success of students in their future careers and satisfaction of their jobs. Although the reasons for both groups look cogent at the first glance, I reckon considering interest is more important and could lead students to success.
The statement mentions educational institutes should guide students to the fields that assure their success and try to protect them from failure. In the reality, recognizing and predicting which field would lead to success for a particular student is not possible. Some may think a deaf person would not be successful in the music and writing song, but we can name Beethoven with stunning plays in the history of music with his deficiency in the hearing. Thus, hard-working and insistence on the goal could lead to success, even others think differently. Therefore, institutes and organizations just could consult with students but they could not assure their success.
Also, some assert the job market should be considered in choosing fields. They believe the final goal of education is finding a job and earning money. However, if students just worry about their future jobs without recognizing their interest may lead to wasting time and disappointment. Given a student that follows Mechanical engineering because he thought he could find a good job and an adequate salary. He spent 4 years in the university and after graduation find out his real interest is in art. It means he waste four years in university whereas he could learn the art that he likes. Even if he pursues Mechanical engineering and gets a job, he would rarely likely to be successful or doing an excellent job, besides, he would not satisfy with his job.
On the other hand, some may claim that the talent of a student plays a critical role in choosing a field for education. They say organizations should find the talents of students in different fields and accordingly students should choose the fields that have talents. Although their idea looks interesting at first, I do not believe in the talent. I think everything is attainable with hard-working. What I mean is that if students choose the fields that they like they would work harder on that field and consequently they gain appropriate skills.
In conclusion, although institutes could consult students in choosing appropriate fields in their education, I reckon they should not restrict students to the specific fields. In other words, students can consult with others like consultants, teachers, and experts but finally, they should decide according to their interests.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 274, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'thinks'.
Suggestion: thinks
...cular student is not possible. Some may think a deaf person would not be successful i...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 71, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to appropriate'
Suggestion: to appropriate
...utes could consult students in choosing appropriate fields in their education, I reckon the...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, besides, but, consequently, finally, first, however, if, look, may, second, so, therefore, thus, whereas, while, i mean, i reckon, i think, in conclusion, in other words, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.5258426966 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 25.0 12.4196629213 201% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 21.0 14.8657303371 141% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 46.0 33.0505617978 139% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 54.0 58.6224719101 92% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2362.0 2235.4752809 106% => OK
No of words: 459.0 442.535393258 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.14596949891 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62863751936 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75404876128 2.79657885939 98% => OK
Unique words: 217.0 215.323595506 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.472766884532 0.4932671777 96% => OK
syllable_count: 687.6 704.065955056 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 6.24550561798 176% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.8804192455 60.3974514979 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.363636364 118.986275619 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8636363636 23.4991977007 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.40909090909 5.21951772744 180% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 10.2758426966 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.158160957405 0.243740707755 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0562551444646 0.0831039109588 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0524885242298 0.0758088955206 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.10611800975 0.150359130593 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0391346728685 0.0667264976115 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 14.1392134831 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.8420337079 122% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.59 12.1639044944 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.03 8.38706741573 96% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 100.480337079 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 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.