A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college.
Should a nation require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college as the writer contends? Many people may agree with this statement because it makes sense that people in a nation should share things in common to live together. However, I disagree with this statement because varieties in people must be an essential resource for groups including nations. Various people have played important roles for nations to have strong competency. People have improved themselves by finding compromising and thus discovering things that they could not have found had they not been different.
Take the United States for example. It is well known that they could effectively develop their country by accepting refugees that were suffered from wars. During World Wars, there were a lot of people who could not show their potential because of their races and nationalities. Back then, the United States accepted them and gave freedom and chance to demonstrate their own potential. It definitely helped the United States improve fast and effectively. If the United States had not opened the chance to be various, it could not have become one of the strongest countries in the world.
Moreover, people normally can see what they are concerned with only. The variety would incite some conflicts at the first place because finding a compromise is difficult, but it is a fairly useful strength of people at the same time. One may find that opinion from others of which one can never think is often a far better idea. This way to find breakthroughs, so-called brainstorming, has leaded people to make better decisions. Various ideas give high possibilities to find better decisions and flexible education can make the variety.
In Korea, one idiom says "One person cannot be a commander." As having seen in foregoing examples, different kinds of people would yield much more valuable results. Therefore, I disagree with this statement. Maybe, this is why many educational experts recommend having as many experiences as possible.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, may, moreover, so, then, therefore, thus, well, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.5258426966 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.4196629213 121% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 29.0 33.0505617978 88% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 58.6224719101 58% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 4.0 12.9106741573 31% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1731.0 2235.4752809 77% => OK
No of words: 333.0 442.535393258 75% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.1981981982 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27180144563 4.55969084622 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71531591313 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 215.323595506 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.600600600601 0.4932671777 122% => OK
syllable_count: 539.1 704.065955056 77% => 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: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.4663545457 60.3974514979 60% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.1052631579 118.986275619 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.5263157895 23.4991977007 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.42105263158 5.21951772744 85% => 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 : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.175398601661 0.243740707755 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0595272889242 0.0831039109588 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.175937658469 0.0758088955206 232% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0944739616486 0.150359130593 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.142530533806 0.0667264976115 214% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 14.1392134831 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.8420337079 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.58 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.65 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 100.480337079 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => 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: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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.