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 not providing much theoretical knowledge but giving more training throughout university courses and its coresponding impacts has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that theories are highly beneficial, such issues are regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined that the practical trains can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From university professors standpoint, learning theories can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the facts that knowledege levels, as well as knowledge base coures, apparently can be seen. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment that discovered the importance of using knowledge. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both students and tutors apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of workers, practical trainings might increase the consequences of universities. Moreover, fundamental aspects of professional trains relate to this reality that the demerits of the university course pertain to knowledge. As a tangible example, a scientific research was undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of theories is correlated to works. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of pratical trains.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of theorical knowledge far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of theories prove its significance, but also pinpoint the practical training 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 : 11.0 10.5418719212 104% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 20.9802955665 95% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 31.9359605911 88% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.75862068966 69% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1428.0 1207.87684729 118% => OK
No of words: 246.0 242.827586207 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.80487804878 5.00649968141 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.96035189615 3.92707691288 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.25936165982 2.71678728327 120% => OK
Unique words: 158.0 139.433497537 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.642276422764 0.580463131201 111% => OK
syllable_count: 445.5 379.143842365 118% => 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: 2.0 1.56157635468 128% => 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: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.5024630542 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.165349123 50.4703680194 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.0 104.977214359 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5 20.9669160288 98% => 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 : 8.0 6.9802955665 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 2.91625615764 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.2182581766 0.242375264174 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0696664657761 0.0925447433944 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0734916763416 0.071462118173 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.119488735455 0.151781067708 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0613685771175 0.0609392437508 101% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 12.6369458128 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.26 53.1260098522 64% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.5 10.9458128079 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.36 11.5310837438 142% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.79 8.32886699507 130% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 55.0591133005 174% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.3980295567 96% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.5123152709 105% => 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.