A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college
Public opinion has polarized on this issue that whether we should require all of the students in our nation to study the same courses or just let them do what they want (i. e. keep the courses diverse so that every student can enroll in their favorite courses) before they are to enter the college. Despite I generally agree with the government should restrain the pool of courses selected, it should not be carried to the extreme. Namely, the courses can be divided into several fields and each student can choose one of them other than the combination produced whole by themselves.
For starters, requiring all the students to take part in one portfolio of courses seems to be advantageous for resource arranging. Moreover, it can be truly convenient for the selection. For instance, the College Entrance Examination in China (as known as "gaokao") is unreplaceable at the status quo of this nation for deciding which parts of students should go to which colleges. However, it can be argued that this method seems to be an expeditient way for this country based on the developing status. In another word, if a developed country chooses to let every student learn the same things, it can be argued that this is a kind of dwindling governing, which means the officers in the government are doing in their comfortable circle.
In contrast, if we let the students choose what they want without any restains, there might be diversity outcoming from them and they can get streng in their shortcomings since they might like to fix it. However, the "gaokao" example should be raised again here since the development of China can explain clearly this status. For first time, China only divided students into two main fields, one contains physics, Chemistry, and Biology while the other contains Politics, History, and Geographic. This influences for several decades and achieves great impact. However, as China is developing at a great speed, the government is going to change this since the nation and people might benefit from the advantage of diversity. However, it gets into mud the first time based on the lack of resources, China is still a developing country that cannot afford the heavy expense of this diversity.
My opinion is to balance these two poles. Like the old ways deduced by China dividing into two fields, we can make a combination for the students to let them choose. It can not only arrange the resource effectively but also give the students diverse courses to choose from to satisfy their needs as large as possible.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 75, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...is issue that whether we should require all of the students in our nation to study the sam...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 170, Rule ID: EG_SPACE[2]
Message: There should be no space here: 'i.e.'.
Suggestion: i.e.
...rses or just let them do what they want i. e. keep the courses diverse so that every ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, moreover, so, still, while, for instance, in contrast, kind of, of course
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.4196629213 153% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 43.0 33.0505617978 130% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 57.0 58.6224719101 97% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2129.0 2235.4752809 95% => OK
No of words: 430.0 442.535393258 97% => OK
Chars per words: 4.9511627907 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55372829156 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70935821881 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 215.323595506 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.493023255814 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 657.0 704.065955056 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.5445927087 60.3974514979 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.277777778 118.986275619 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.8888888889 23.4991977007 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.77777777778 5.21951772744 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.192964096599 0.243740707755 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0612488881998 0.0831039109588 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0756073916949 0.0758088955206 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.121356192396 0.150359130593 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0722453285451 0.0667264976115 108% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 14.1392134831 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.8420337079 116% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.1743820225 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.73 12.1639044944 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.05 8.38706741573 96% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 100.480337079 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.8971910112 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => 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.