Some people think that all university students should study whatever they like. Others believe that they should only be allowed to study subjects that will be useful in the future, such as those related to science and technology.
Discuss both views and give your own opinion
There is a notion that it should be obligatory that undergraduates only take courses in such fields which are thought to be beneficial later as science and technology. Personally, I am in favour of the opposing perception which values students’ freedom of choice.
On the one hand, it is significantly easier for university students to advance in their academic and career path when they are given the right to opt for what to study. Only when they are allowed to pursue their genuine passions or interests can they attain the best results. Additionally, not every student possesses the same academic ability and intellectual level. Thus, to facilitate learning, there needs to be different subjects widely available for different groups of students to select. Another reason why the right to choose what to study matters is the fact that a considerable number of students may base their selection on the financial condition of their family. As a result, those from disadvantaged families might find it impossible to afford education in fields with high tuition fees.
On the other hand, those in support of shared compulsory curricula may argue that sufficient education in the areas of technology or science will provide students with easier access to jobs when they graduate from university. This can be attributed to the fact that there are increasingly vacant positions in such fields and that the income of those holding such positions is rather high compared to that in other areas. However, I believe that an extreme tendency towards particular fields of study can cause a serious imbalance, which will in turn lead to unemployment in those fields but a lack of workforce in others.
In conclusion, advocates of the two mentioned ideas may have their own ways to reason their beliefs. Anecdotally, it is unnecessary and ineffectual to impose such restriction on the subjects that a university student can study. They should be given the freedom to study whatever they find suitable for them in the interests of their future development.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 142, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[3]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
...hich are thought to be beneficial later as science and technology. Personally, I a...
^^
Line 7, column 93, Rule ID: BELIEVE_BELIEF[1]
Message: Did you mean 'beliefs' (noun) instead of believes (verb)?
Suggestion: beliefs
...may have their own ways to reason their believes. Anecdotally, it is unnecessary and ine...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, may, so, thus, in conclusion, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 7.30460921844 205% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 34.0 24.0651302605 141% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 51.0 41.998997996 121% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.3376753507 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1727.0 1615.20841683 107% => OK
No of words: 335.0 315.596192385 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1552238806 5.12529762239 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27820116611 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88158826035 2.80592935109 103% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 176.041082164 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.528358208955 0.561755894193 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 544.5 506.74238477 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.3925952167 49.4020404114 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.357142857 106.682146367 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.9285714286 20.7667163134 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.57142857143 7.06120827912 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.302494086702 0.244688304435 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0950585708417 0.084324248473 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0723208082557 0.0667982634062 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.182435803736 0.151304729494 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0209531642796 0.056905535591 37% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 13.0946893788 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 50.2224549098 96% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.4159519038 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.21 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 78.4519038076 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.