Recently, the phenomenon of re-introducing the classical or dead languages into the school curriculum and its corresponding impacts have sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of complex procedures is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and consequently positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that getting job with re-introducing the dead and classical languages can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a general standpoint, getting jobs by using ancient and impractical languages into the school curriculum can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that crucial issues, as well as ultimate outcomes, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered current policies. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both this common phenomenon and accordingly complicated procedures apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of a public arena, training the mind with preparing for a career using education and the school curriculum might increase the consequences of critical needs. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of creative processes is correlated negatively with vital issues. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of this remarkable phenomenon.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of getting jobs and training the mind by using impractical and ancient languages with preparing for a career far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of this unique phenomenon prove the significance of total outcomes, but also pinpoint thorny issues potential implications.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, apparently, but, consequently, hence, if, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 6.10837438424 82% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 8.36945812808 131% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 20.9802955665 91% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 31.9359605911 103% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.75862068966 69% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1627.0 1207.87684729 135% => OK
No of words: 285.0 242.827586207 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.70877192982 5.00649968141 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10876417139 3.92707691288 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.23648788058 2.71678728327 119% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 139.433497537 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.610526315789 0.580463131201 105% => OK
syllable_count: 515.7 379.143842365 136% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.5024630542 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 50.7562641169 50.4703680194 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 147.909090909 104.977214359 141% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.9090909091 20.9669160288 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.54545454545 7.25397266985 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 6.9802955665 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 2.75862068966 109% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 2.91625615764 69% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.189723546508 0.242375264174 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0671550471744 0.0925447433944 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0774607325766 0.071462118173 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111035301694 0.151781067708 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0597480244565 0.0609392437508 98% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.4 12.6369458128 146% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 29.18 53.1260098522 55% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 10.9458128079 141% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.13 11.5310837438 140% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.58 8.32886699507 127% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 55.0591133005 187% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 9.94827586207 156% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.3980295567 115% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.5123152709 152% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.8888888889 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 80.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.