Universities should require every student to take a variety of courses outside the student’s field of study.
Diversity propelled many improvements in our society. Therefore, the author’s argument, requiring students to take various courses outside of their fields, seems plausible, and some people agree with this notion. However, there are unignorable disadvantages of taking a variety of courses, which makes the argument might not be agreeable
Admittedly, having chances to learn outside of one’s field will guarantee a lot of opportunities to learn various things which will be beneficial in near future, because sometimes, adopting solution from other fields is more effective than finding one in one field. For example, when Steve Jobs was looking for new methods to promote his products, he realized that some classes related to calligraphy he took before could be useful. He applied aesthetic calligraphies into font styles in his software, and this adoption became one of the reasons that made him successful. There is another example. Development of artificial intelligence is also a gift from combination of mathematics and computer science. When computer scientists reached at limit, their knowledge in advanced mathematics and statistics made a pathway to break through the limit, and it became a beginning of machine learning and data science, which are popularly used to develop artificial intelligences now. As these examples shows, taking courses outside of student’s field might be beneficial someday when they are faced with impediments.
However, the author’s recommendation could make student less knowledgeable in their original field. As science and technology develop faster than before, there are more complicated subjects that students should learn before they graduate. If they lose their time to focus on their own study, there are possibilities that they might not have proper knowledge to be considered experts. Also, some greatest scientists were able to be successful by having more depth in their field rather than widening their knowledge by taking various courses outside of their fields. For example, Albert Einstein, who is considered one of the greatest physicists, devoted his whole life to study and research on issues in physics. Although he didn’t spend his time to learn other fields, he discovered and examined most complicated issues in his fields, and what he achieved is still worshiped by physicist in present. If he had spent his time to study other fields, for example, politics or chemistry, his might have not be successful as a physicist. As this shows, letting students to focus on research about their fields will be beneficial as much as making them to take various courses outside of their fields.
In sum, due to possibilities of losing chance to have depth in students’ original fields, forcing students to take courses outside of their fields could be dangerous even thought this proposal has its own advantages. Therefore, the author’s argument might be considered radical and needs more careful assessment about its advantages and disadvantages.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 1005, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'been'.
Suggestion: been
...litics or chemistry, his might have not be successful as a physicist. As this show...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, look, so, still, therefore, for example, of course
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.5258426966 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 44.0 33.0505617978 133% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 70.0 58.6224719101 119% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2557.0 2235.4752809 114% => OK
No of words: 468.0 442.535393258 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.46367521368 5.05705443957 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65116196802 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88932110634 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 239.0 215.323595506 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.510683760684 0.4932671777 104% => OK
syllable_count: 783.0 704.065955056 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 3.10617977528 290% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 76.5452810786 60.3974514979 127% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.578947368 118.986275619 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.6315789474 23.4991977007 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.63157894737 5.21951772744 70% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => 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: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.239316541076 0.243740707755 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0791023194309 0.0831039109588 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0948694065641 0.0758088955206 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.171732826654 0.150359130593 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0394161011813 0.0667264976115 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 14.1392134831 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.8420337079 79% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.68 12.1639044944 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.88 8.38706741573 106% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 100.480337079 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.8971910112 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => 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: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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.