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.
This statement recommands schools to dissuade students from studying subjects that they are unlikely to succeed. As far as I am concerned, in this case, to measure the probability of success, schools need to know two things: the potential of the field and the ability of the student. However, often times education institutions are not able to assess these two things fairly. Thus, I do not agree with this statement.
Primarily, even schools cannot accurately predict the future of fields of studies. Take the invention of flight as an instance. Before flight really came into being, it was only the imaginary stuff in some fictions. Few people really took it serious and believed one day we would truly have this kind of machine. If we had adopted the policy proposed by the statement, schools would have actively dissuade everyone not to waste their time on inventing flight. And probably the Wright brothers would have been one of the students that are discouraged. Therefore, schools should not assert if one field really worth investigation or not since no one knows the future.
In addition, education institutions also can neither know if a student is likely to succeed in a certain field nor fairly judge a student's ability and talent. Since the major ways of assessing students' abilities in many schools are still written exams and assignments, the only thing we can know is the academic performance of students. However, the academic performance means little when it comes to succeeding in a certain fields. Take, for example, conducting biological research. To grow some plants, animals or cells, record the condition of them every few hours and collect a bunch of accurate data, researchers need to be cautious, perservance and diligence. In this case, those who are considered to be excellent base on their academic performance by schools, may not necesserily be the best researcher, vise versa.
In conclusion, since it is hard for education instuition to really make correct assessment on the possiblity of success and make useful suggestion for student, it would be wise if they just let students follow their interest and will to pursue their study.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 398, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'dissuaded'.
Suggestion: dissuaded
... statement, schools would have actively dissuade everyone not to waste their time on inv...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 131, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'students'' or 'student's'?
Suggestion: students'; student's
...d in a certain field nor fairly judge a students ability and talent. Since the major way...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, may, really, so, still, therefore, thus, for example, in addition, in conclusion, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 11.3162921348 35% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 33.0505617978 79% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 58.6224719101 78% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 12.9106741573 147% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1820.0 2235.4752809 81% => OK
No of words: 357.0 442.535393258 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.09803921569 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34677393335 4.55969084622 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74985011422 2.79657885939 98% => OK
Unique words: 208.0 215.323595506 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.582633053221 0.4932671777 118% => OK
syllable_count: 567.9 704.065955056 81% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.740449438202 0% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.740606049 60.3974514979 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.111111111 118.986275619 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8333333333 23.4991977007 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 5.21951772744 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => 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: 0.149339848056 0.243740707755 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0474633732563 0.0831039109588 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0536015321953 0.0758088955206 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0945006193932 0.150359130593 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0300874439875 0.0667264976115 45% => 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: 12.5 14.1392134831 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.8420337079 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.3 12.1639044944 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.47 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 100.480337079 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 11.8971910112 59% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => 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.