Student travel to study is overrated, we have brilliant scholars who studied locally. Is travel really required for higher studies?
Recently, the phenomenon of the overrated student travel 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 having brilliant scholars who studied locally can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a general standpoint, the necessity of travels for higher studies 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, having brilliant scholars who studied locally 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 the requirement of overrated student travels and having brilliant scholars who study locally 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 : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 5.94088669951 202% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 19.0 20.9802955665 91% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 31.9359605911 88% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.75862068966 69% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1501.0 1207.87684729 124% => OK
No of words: 259.0 242.827586207 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.79536679537 5.00649968141 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01166760082 3.92707691288 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.19428015509 2.71678728327 118% => OK
Unique words: 170.0 139.433497537 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.656370656371 0.580463131201 113% => OK
syllable_count: 478.8 379.143842365 126% => 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: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.5024630542 112% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.3729045995 50.4703680194 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.454545455 104.977214359 130% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5454545455 20.9669160288 112% => 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 : 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: 0.298293476109 0.242375264174 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0994467044529 0.0925447433944 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.11231246263 0.071462118173 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.174820772783 0.151781067708 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0451926663034 0.0609392437508 74% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.7 12.6369458128 140% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 53.1260098522 59% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 10.9458128079 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.66 11.5310837438 144% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.12 8.32886699507 134% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 55.0591133005 189% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.3980295567 108% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.5123152709 143% => 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.