Some people think that universities should not provide so much theoretical knowledge but give more practical training throughout their courses. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
Recently, the phenomenon of the providing theoretical knowledge and it’s corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of universities is highly beneficial, such issue regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that practical training can be a plus and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, practical training can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that merits of universities, as well as courses, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered theoretical knowledge. Thus, beneficial ramification of both teaching methods and teachers apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of science, teaching methods might increase the consequences of students. Moreover, fundamental aspects of universities could relate to this reality that the demerits of knowledge pertain to theoretical courses. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of assignments is correlated negatively with practical courses. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of modern universities.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of modern universities far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of old methods prove the significance of practical courses, but also pinpoint theoretical knowledge implications.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, hence, if, moreover, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.5418719212 85% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 31.9359605911 97% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.75862068966 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1424.0 1207.87684729 118% => OK
No of words: 241.0 242.827586207 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.90871369295 5.00649968141 118% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.94007293032 3.92707691288 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.36236333023 2.71678728327 124% => OK
Unique words: 155.0 139.433497537 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.643153526971 0.580463131201 111% => OK
syllable_count: 448.2 379.143842365 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.57093596059 121% => 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: 1.0 0.931034482759 107% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.5024630542 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.0733028366 50.4703680194 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.666666667 104.977214359 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0833333333 20.9669160288 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.41666666667 7.25397266985 88% => 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 : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 2.91625615764 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.246211734465 0.242375264174 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.077296985926 0.0925447433944 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0634289594369 0.071462118173 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.138182044076 0.151781067708 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0179843311763 0.0609392437508 30% => 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: 16.4 12.6369458128 130% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 25.8 53.1260098522 49% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 10.9458128079 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.0 11.5310837438 147% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.79 8.32886699507 130% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 55.0591133005 171% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.94827586207 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.3980295567 96% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.5123152709 162% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.5 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.