Pupils have always had trouble with money management. The rooted causes could be in curriculum or parents' manners. Schools and families can take some measures to address this issue, which I express now.
The reasons for lacking financial knowledge in graduated students can conceptualize in two aspects. In terms of curriculum, schools' taught subjects are more theoretical than practical. For example, they learn math, probability, and logic, but they have rarely been told how they can use these subjects in their daily life to generate revenue. Considering families, parents mostly put pressure on their children to study hard and get brilliant scores because they believe pursuing education in university would guarantee their children's future life.
In order to overcome this problem, two solutions are recommended. By adding practical subjects, workshops, and inviting financial experts, pupils can learn how wisely invest in the stock market or set up a company. Besides, they would be able to calculate a project's benefits and decide whether to get a loan for that or reject it. Furthermore, parents should tempt their children to take risks and step outside their comfort zone. They should relieve the pressure on students because teenagers could be successful even if not enter the university. Lastly, teachers could encourage students to take a part-time job, broadening students' minds and horizons by exposing different issues.
In conclusion, I suppose the causes of deficits in finance knowledge are rooted in the presented subjects at school and parents' behaviors. This issue could be dealt with by conducting workshops and changing parents' manners.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, furthermore, if, lastly, so, for example, i suppose, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 7.30460921844 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 41.998997996 76% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 8.3376753507 36% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1409.0 1615.20841683 87% => OK
No of words: 258.0 315.596192385 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.46124031008 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00778971557 4.20363070211 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72478414758 2.80592935109 97% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 176.041082164 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.635658914729 0.561755894193 113% => OK
syllable_count: 423.9 506.74238477 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.0457516127 49.4020404114 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.9333333333 106.682146367 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.2 20.7667163134 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.33333333333 7.06120827912 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 3.4128256513 205% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.244780064366 0.244688304435 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0703753241658 0.084324248473 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0347442469945 0.0667982634062 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.132358294233 0.151304729494 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0520382587732 0.056905535591 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 13.0946893788 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 50.2224549098 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.3001002004 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.09 12.4159519038 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.38 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 78.4519038076 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.