A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college
Education is one of the parameters on how well a country is doing. Consequently, governments around the world are racing to give the best possible education to the people. The prompt recommends the enforcement of a requirement for students to study the same national curriculum. This is no easy task to tackle. However, granting a standardization of a nation’s curriculum may give a leg-up for students coming from a disadvantage backgrounds and locations for two reasons.
To begin, a good education system is where everybody nationwide has the same chances to learn and find what they desire. For instance, Indonesia is consisted of many islands. Some are more rural than the others. Due to this, the lifestyle differs. Thus, it is natural to expect that students from Jakarta which is the capital of Indonesia would have a better exposure to foreign language education. How about the students in other cities and islands? If the curriculum enforced by the government does not support foreign language education and there are no private language schools that are widely available, how will students in these locations realize that they might or might not have a passion for learning languages at the first place?
Further, the standardized curriculum would support a fair education in terms the subject materials. Consider two schools; first that has good resources so that they can educate the students more in-depth, and the second only has cover a fraction of that. Comparably, graduates of these schools would have acquired a different volume of knowledge. Hence, if the graduates would hold different chances in applying to a college. It is suitable to assume the second school would be mainly found in remote regions. Therefore, students coming from these regions would be less competitive in the university’s applicants pool.
For the above reasons, it is beneficial for a nation to follow the suggestion given by the prompt. However, one needs to consider also what denying the suggestion would provide against. With educational differences occur various regions, schools can be more competitive between each other in tailoring their programs. Despite this, the greater good of the nation is not put forth, and only some can be prosperous.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, first, hence, however, if, may, second, so, therefore, thus, well, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.4196629213 113% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 33.0505617978 57% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 58.6224719101 77% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1900.0 2235.4752809 85% => OK
No of words: 363.0 442.535393258 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.23415977961 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.3649236973 4.55969084622 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87111556209 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 215.323595506 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.537190082645 0.4932671777 109% => OK
syllable_count: 590.4 704.065955056 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 23.0359550562 69% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 54.9829612976 60.3974514979 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.3636363636 118.986275619 73% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.5 23.4991977007 70% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.5 5.21951772744 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.168345898631 0.243740707755 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0475296196336 0.0831039109588 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0837083915293 0.0758088955206 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.106443500111 0.150359130593 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0624715889123 0.0667264976115 94% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 14.1392134831 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 48.8420337079 113% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.1743820225 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.76 12.1639044944 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.61 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 100.480337079 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.2143820225 75% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => 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: 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.