A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college
The curriculum taken by the student for his or her studies prior to graduate studies (in college) defines, in a way, the foundation of the particular student. Each student has a unique talent and a unique way of understanding things. Some students are good at science and maths, while others are good at business, arts, etc. The prompt suggests that before entering college all students should be required, independent of their own interests, to study a nation-based ubiquitous curriculum which is expected to be followed everywhere. I moderately disagree with the prompt due to three reasons.
A national curriculum, in many ways, can neither cater to nor accomodate the disparate interests of students. In high school, some students might develop a predilection for music, while some students may want to focus on mathematics or perhaps theoretical computational field. If the mentioned nation wide curriculum forces all students to take computer based and mathematics based courses, the students will never get a chance to explore other fields that they might enjoy more than the ones they are forced to enroll in. For instance, there can be cases where a student, if exposed to sports and arts would excelor perform much better than, say, theoretical physics, which he or she is forced to take as a part of the curriculum. Therefore, it is quite possible that the student might even loose interest and confidence in graduate studies (due to lack of exposure of fields) and may not even enroll in college, or drop out soon. As hypothesised, the interest and confidence of the student in college depends on the national curriculum. This implies that a nation based curriculum might deprive the nation of, what could have been prodigies. Most importantly, it might have an adverse affect on the mental health of the student as they are likely to develop a bad self-image (attained due to poor performance in college or lack of interest).
Additionally, it is likely that a nation based curriculum would be defined in the best interest of the nation rather than undergraduate students as a whole. If the government, at one time believes that the economy of the country can be improved if the number of software engineers in the country increase, they might come up with a dictum mentioning mandatory computer science courses for all students, i.e. a nation based curriculum based solely on computer sciences. However, it is quite likely that the boost in the sector is ephemeral: in 2010s the machine learning field was one of the most lucrative fields in the computer science domain while around ten years later, blockchain has received a big boost and is now one of the most lucrative job fields. Therefore, to base the curriculum on unforeseeable changes might be counterproductive as people 'forced' to train in software engineering once might not be able to secure jobs few years later, greatly affecting the economy.
Although the curriculum should be flexible, there should be some restrictions on the necessary courses in pre nursery and schools below high school level. Said restrictions are prudent as a student who has just started with school is unaware of the fields he will excel in (in the future: ignoring any prophetic ability one may have). Therefore to get a taste or jist of existing fields and to avoid restricting one to what seems then, a 'serendipitous field', the government may make some courses necesary for all students like physical education, science, history, etc. There sould be a well thought-out planning by the national experts to decide such courses and should be kept as vast as possibe to provide the needed exposure to students.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 295, Rule ID: NATION_WIDE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'nationwide'?
Suggestion: nationwide
...l computational field. If the mentioned nation wide curriculum forces all students to take ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1186, Rule ID: AFFECT_EFFECT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'effect'?
Suggestion: effect
...t importantly, it might have an adverse affect on the mental health of the student as the...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 541, Rule ID: IN_1990s[1]
Message: The article is probably missing here: 'in the 2010s'.
Suggestion: in the 2010s
...t the boost in the sector is ephemeral: in 2010s the machine learning field was one of t...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 571, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to field'
Suggestion: to field
...phemeral: in 2010s the machine learning field was one of the most lucrative fields in...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 271, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: in
... is unaware of the fields he will excel in in the future: ignoring any prophetic abil...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 334, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...ing any prophetic ability one may have. Therefore to get a taste or jist of existing fiel...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, may, so, then, therefore, well, while, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.5258426966 133% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 24.0 12.4196629213 193% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 14.8657303371 121% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 33.0505617978 70% => OK
Preposition: 80.0 58.6224719101 136% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3057.0 2235.4752809 137% => OK
No of words: 608.0 442.535393258 137% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.02796052632 5.05705443957 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.9656475924 4.55969084622 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8350945872 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 298.0 215.323595506 138% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.490131578947 0.4932671777 99% => OK
syllable_count: 969.3 704.065955056 138% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 9.0 4.99550561798 180% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.10617977528 225% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 28.0 23.0359550562 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 65.9548735991 60.3974514979 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 145.571428571 118.986275619 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.9523809524 23.4991977007 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.04761904762 5.21951772744 58% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.308552608057 0.243740707755 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.10648444791 0.0831039109588 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0894291800021 0.0758088955206 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.2005060615 0.150359130593 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0778503743253 0.0667264976115 117% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.7 14.1392134831 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.06 48.8420337079 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.1743820225 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.49 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.69 8.38706741573 104% => OK
difficult_words: 141.0 100.480337079 140% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 11.2143820225 118% => 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: 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.