Educational institutions should dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed.
The given statement tells us that educational institutions should dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed. The given statement is marred by indiscriminate word choice which greatly reduces its efficacy. The same seriously undermines the credibility of the statement and renders the sentiment expressed superficial. The statement is marginally opinionated and subjective in nature, which compromises the clarity, potency and impact of sentiment expressed.
To begin with use of word field is problematic as statement does not defines the type of field of study, whether new field of study is related to their current course or a new one. Both type requires different approach to learn, If new field is related to their current field of study then it is easy for student to imbibe the new field but if new field study is completely different then it would take extra effort to learn the field of study. For example, If a student of history chooses the political history as its new field of study, it would take less effort for him/her to learn about this field of study while if same student chooses mathematics as new field of study then it will take painstaking effort to learn about this field Thus, statement should have specified the type of new field of study.
Additionally, it can be argued about the criteria on which college institutions decides particular field of study at which student is unlikely to succeed. Statement should have specified the criteria for predicting the success of student in a particular field whether prediction is done on the grades of the student acquired in examination or the choice is given to the students to select specific new field of study. For example if choice is given to the student to select the new field of study based on their interest then it would be beneficial for the student as they could lean from new field to fullest of it.
Further it can be argued that above statement presents college institutions as stickler. Instead of letting students to select the new field of study based on their interest, above statement imposes the field of study on the students which the college authority thinks better for student ignoring the fact whether the student has a interest in it or not. For example a student has a interest in the web development course but the college makes student to learn machine learning without considering the interest of the student.
It can be concluded that by ignoring the factors which are critical for the assessment of the statement the issue becomes somewhat unilateral and subject to subjective generalization. On grounds of pure logic and reason one cannot agree with this statement which suffers a great extent due to use of words that are poorly defined and used in desultory manner.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 250, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ice which greatly reduces its efficacy. The same seriously undermines the credibili...
^^^
Line 1, column 362, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...rs the sentiment expressed superficial. The statement is marginally opinionated and...
^^^
Line 3, column 70, Rule ID: DOES_X_HAS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'define'? As 'do' is already inflected, the verb cannot also be inflected.
Suggestion: define
...ld is problematic as statement does not defines the type of field of study, whether new...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 70, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[3]
Message: The verb 'does' requires base form of the verb: 'define'
Suggestion: define
...ld is problematic as statement does not defines the type of field of study, whether new...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 385, Rule ID: RATHER_THEN[2]
Message: Did you mean 'different 'from''? 'Different than' is often considered colloquial style.
Suggestion: from
...new field study is completely different then it would take extra effort to learn the...
^^^^
Line 3, column 755, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...o learn about this field Thus, statement should have specified the type of new f...
^^
Line 3, column 790, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ement should have specified the type of new field of study. Additionally, it ...
^^
Line 7, column 331, 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
...noring the fact whether the student has a interest in it or not. For example a st...
^
Line 7, column 382, 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
...in it or not. For example a student has a interest in the web development course ...
^
Line 7, column 462, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to machine'
Suggestion: to machine
... but the college makes student to learn machine learning without considering the intere...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, so, then, thus, while, for example, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 33.0505617978 85% => OK
Preposition: 74.0 58.6224719101 126% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 12.9106741573 139% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2358.0 2235.4752809 105% => OK
No of words: 474.0 442.535393258 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.9746835443 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.66599839874 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69242619001 2.79657885939 96% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 215.323595506 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.386075949367 0.4932671777 78% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 739.8 704.065955056 105% => 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: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.2370786517 74% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 31.0 23.0359550562 135% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 72.3016520481 60.3974514979 120% => OK
Chars per sentence: 157.2 118.986275619 132% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.6 23.4991977007 134% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.86666666667 5.21951772744 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 10.0 7.80617977528 128% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.401347348451 0.243740707755 165% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.16452792771 0.0831039109588 198% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.189660151629 0.0758088955206 250% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.233588295063 0.150359130593 155% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.12238333893 0.0667264976115 183% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.8 14.1392134831 126% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.01 48.8420337079 82% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 12.1743820225 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.14 12.1639044944 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.34 8.38706741573 99% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 100.480337079 95% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 11.8971910112 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.4 11.2143820225 128% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.