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 giving practical training instead of theoretical knowledge and its corresponding impact has a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of reinforcing the practical ability is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that the study of using both practical and theoretical educational methods can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
First and the foremost, from a social standpoint, developing the practical ability can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that merits of promoting the cognitive skills, as well as the teamwork ability, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered the influence of using the practical training on developing the capacity of a student’s brain. Thus, the beneficial ramifications of both the oral presentation and working in the lab can be seen.
On the other hand, within the realm of science, providing more practical lessons through the courses might increase the consequences of doing the practical task. Moreover, the fundamental aspects of more manual lessons could relate to this reality that the demerits of theoretical subjects pertain to lack of applicable materials. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of the practical courses is correlated negatively with lack of educational devices. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of the job opportunity.
To sum up, it can be seen that while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I Profoundly believe that the benefits of giving more practical training far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of more mechanical courses prove the significance of stimulating the student’s practical ability, but also pinpoint practical implications.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, if, moreover, so, thus, well, while, as well as, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.5418719212 104% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 6.10837438424 115% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 5.94088669951 185% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 20.9802955665 95% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 31.9359605911 135% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.75862068966 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1760.0 1207.87684729 146% => OK
No of words: 316.0 242.827586207 130% => OK
Chars per words: 5.56962025316 5.00649968141 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21620550194 3.92707691288 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.23685142976 2.71678728327 119% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 139.433497537 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.579113924051 0.580463131201 100% => OK
syllable_count: 561.6 379.143842365 148% => 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: 3.0 1.56157635468 192% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
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: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 20.5024630542 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 47.7926656391 50.4703680194 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 146.666666667 104.977214359 140% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.3333333333 20.9669160288 126% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.91666666667 7.25397266985 109% => 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 : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => 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: 0.231389423627 0.242375264174 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0781674678939 0.0925447433944 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0475267589953 0.071462118173 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.134291759539 0.151781067708 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0279366569995 0.0609392437508 46% => 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: 18.0 12.6369458128 142% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 28.17 53.1260098522 53% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 10.9458128079 144% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.32 11.5310837438 133% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.12 8.32886699507 122% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 55.0591133005 189% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 9.94827586207 156% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.3980295567 119% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.5123152709 152% => 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.