Educators should find out what students want included in the curriculum and then offer it to them.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
The decision about whether educators should make up curriculums based on students preferences is tricky. The are several plausible arguments supporting either one side or the other. In my opinion, the curriculum should not be utterly an imcubence of students, because they can choose the subjects by level of difficulty rather than by essenciality. Furthermore, students do not have necessary expertise to decide which subjects should be teached to them, neither how to best arrange these subjects together. Last, dealing with multiples syllabus would be impracticable to educational institutions.
To begin with, when a curriculum is developed, educators take into account the relevance of the subjects to students' life. If the decision of which subjects should be included in the curriculum is delegated to students, they may choose the subjects according to how easy they are compared to others. In consequence, they could be neglecting the importance of some knowledge that will be important for them in the future. For this reason, students should not have flexibility to compose a curriculum freely.
Also, it is unlikely that the students excel all subjects before attending classes. Thereby, it would be hard for them to evaluate which subjects to choose to create a reasonable curriculum. Even if they choose relevant subjects, they probably would be unaware about whether those subjects are related or not. The set of subjects is not the only important decision in composing a syllabus, but also whether this set can be splited in small and self-contained sets of palatable subjects.
Last, but not least, it would be a convoluted problem to educational institutions to manage multiple curriculums. First, it would be difficult to combine all students preferences in a syllabus that would please all the students. Second, it would be impracticable to offer different curriculums to distinct individuals. By not giving to students the power freely customize their curriculums, educators can come up with a set of common subjects, which institutions could easily handle.
On the other hand, one may say that, if students can choose their curriculums, they would be more excited about learning, which could decrease the number of students evasion and, eventually, illiteracy. However, there are other ways of drawing students attention to classes. Educators may ameliorate their didactics, increase interactivity by gamification or provide extra-class exciting activities to hone students' engagement despite of an extant penchant for the subject.
In conclusion, students should not choose freely the curriculum they want to follow, because they can choose the subjects by their complexities, rather than by their relevance to their lifes. Moreover, students do not have enough expertise to decide which disciplines are more relevant to their life and how they work together. Finally, it would be knotty to educational institutions to manage different kinds of curriculums.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 106, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...ased on students preferences is tricky. The are several plausible arguments supporting ...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 359, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ncrease interactivity by gamification or provide extra-class exciting activities ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, second, so, in conclusion, in my opinion, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.5258426966 123% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 27.0 12.4196629213 217% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 33.0505617978 106% => OK
Preposition: 68.0 58.6224719101 116% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2535.0 2235.4752809 113% => OK
No of words: 461.0 442.535393258 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.4989154013 5.05705443957 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.63367139033 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03784459309 2.79657885939 109% => OK
Unique words: 215.0 215.323595506 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.466377440347 0.4932671777 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 794.7 704.065955056 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.8015622963 60.3974514979 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.217391304 118.986275619 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0434782609 23.4991977007 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.17391304348 5.21951772744 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.160253408867 0.243740707755 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0608058016348 0.0831039109588 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0448973053578 0.0758088955206 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.103441850464 0.150359130593 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0374851168751 0.0667264976115 56% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 14.1392134831 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.8420337079 87% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.62 12.1639044944 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.53 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 100.480337079 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => 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.