Rather than choose a subject that is suitable for future employment possibilities, you should choose a subject that you interested in or could get good grades. Agree or disagree?
Recently, the phenomenon of "rather than choosing a subject that is suitable for future employment possibilities, you should choose a subject that you interested in or could get good grades" and its corresponding impact has sparked a long-running dispute. Whereas many people are debating the proposition that selecting a subject that you interested in might be remarkably fruitful, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a remarkable number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that selecting future employment possibilities can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From the economics standpoint, choosing a subject that is suitable for future employment possibilities can provide the society with profound effects, which might stem from the fact that skilled workers and more income are inextricably bound up. Regarding my personal experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment that discovered the importance of employment possibilities. Thus, invaluable ramifications of both job opportunities and unemployment rate distinctly can be observed.
Within the realm of psychology, without the slightest doubt, choosing a subject that you interested in might exacerbate the already catastrophic consequences of self-esteem. Moreover, fundamental aspects of job satisfaction can relate to the reality that the demerits of uninterested subjects can pertain to the lack of knowledge. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that if the downsides of puzzling the subject selection were correlated positively with good instructors, the local authorities would ultimately address the student's grades. Hence, it is reasonable to infer the preconceived notion of interesting subjects.
To conclude, despite several compelling arguments on both sides, I opt vigorously to support the idea that the merits of choosing a subject that is suitable for future employment possibilities far outweigh its downsides.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 243, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...nd its corresponding impact has sparked a long-running dispute. Whereas many people are debati...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
hence, if, moreover, regarding, so, thus, whereas
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.5418719212 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 6.10837438424 196% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 5.94088669951 269% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 28.0 20.9802955665 133% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 34.0 31.9359605911 106% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 5.75862068966 208% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1765.0 1207.87684729 146% => OK
No of words: 300.0 242.827586207 124% => OK
Chars per words: 5.88333333333 5.00649968141 118% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16179145029 3.92707691288 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.43008098382 2.71678728327 126% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 139.433497537 130% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.603333333333 0.580463131201 104% => OK
syllable_count: 553.5 379.143842365 146% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.6157635468 108% => OK
Article: 2.0 1.56157635468 128% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.71428571429 117% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.65517241379 164% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 20.5024630542 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 61.9329149194 50.4703680194 123% => OK
Chars per sentence: 160.454545455 104.977214359 153% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.2727272727 20.9669160288 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.45454545455 7.25397266985 61% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 6.9802955665 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.44954443508 0.242375264174 185% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.141842720093 0.0925447433944 153% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.154122253065 0.071462118173 216% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.255112748713 0.151781067708 168% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.125163293887 0.0609392437508 205% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.9 12.6369458128 157% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 27.15 53.1260098522 51% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.2 10.9458128079 148% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.12 11.5310837438 148% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.66 8.32886699507 128% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 55.0591133005 196% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.0 9.94827586207 161% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.3980295567 123% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.5123152709 124% => 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.