It is true that today's world is of technology. It has revolutionized the world in every field. Learning technology helps us to move with the pace of the world. But, the argument/recommendation is unconvincing since there are many important questions that the argument fails to consider. These questions need to be answered before we can assay the merit of this recommendation/argument.
The first and foremost question that needs to be answered that the argument has not taken into consideration the interest of students and the level of the students. Some students who belong to humanities would like to make their career in that field, making programming compulsory for them, would be to no avail. Programming requires aptitude and problem-solving skills. All the students would not have these qualities, they might be afraid of problem-solving skills and decision-making. Therefore, making programming compulsory for all of them would be futile.
The second most question that the argument needs to answer is that it makes an assumption that all students would be keen to learn to program. The statement should consider the interest of the students before taking the decision of inclusion of programming into the curriculum.
The Curriculum should be flexible so that students can opt for what they keen to learn and study.
The statement has not given any statistical data to establish the fact that after learning to program how many students have got high-paying jobs after learning to program. Students should learn to program as it gives a high package, no figure has been given to demonstrate the same. After learning to program, people are living fulfilling life no evidence has been stated to prove the same. Earning too much money does not ensure fulfilling lives. It might be the case that the person is deprived of many things like happiness which are required to lead a fulfilling life that too after earning much money. There is no correlation between the high- paying jobs and fulfilling life.
The assumption that even if they pursue other careers, programming will still benefit them, is an absurd statement. If someone wants to make a career in journalism or the medical field, then learning programming would be of no advantage to them. It would be good for them to devote much time to learn more about their field and gain expertise in that stream only. Students who belong to engineering backgrounds would get benefit if they learn to program. The argument lacks assumptions about a stream of the students like to pursue or belong to.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 1, 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.
... of programming into the curriculum. The Curriculum should be flexible so that s...
^^^
Line 8, column 1, 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.
...for what they keen to learn and study. The statement has not given any statistical...
^^^
Line 9, column 200, Rule ID: AFFORD_VBG[1]
Message: This verb is used with infinitive: 'to program', 'to programme'.
Suggestion: to program; to programme
...ism or the medical field, then learning programming would be of no advantage to them. It wo...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, second, so, still, then, therefore, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.5258426966 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.4196629213 137% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 11.3162921348 150% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 33.0505617978 109% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 58.6224719101 102% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 12.9106741573 139% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2149.0 2235.4752809 96% => OK
No of words: 422.0 442.535393258 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09241706161 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.53239876712 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03766052422 2.79657885939 109% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 215.323595506 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.46682464455 0.4932671777 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 641.7 704.065955056 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.4803742899 60.3974514979 60% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.5416666667 118.986275619 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.5833333333 23.4991977007 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.58333333333 5.21951772744 49% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => 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: 0.19354764243 0.243740707755 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0612217427876 0.0831039109588 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0450108559679 0.0758088955206 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111669099423 0.150359130593 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0435541074407 0.0667264976115 65% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 14.1392134831 80% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 48.8420337079 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 12.1743820225 71% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.95 12.1639044944 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.44 8.38706741573 89% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 100.480337079 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 11.8971910112 59% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.