It is more important for schoolchildren to learn about local history than world history. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Teaching history for schoolchildren has been a heated topic constantly. There is a common belief that local history is more important to children than world history. However, I disagree with this belief.
I believe the notion that local history is more valuable than world history should be rejected. Some people may claim that the insights into the local historical values are completely enough for one to live. Their argument could be true a few decades ago when most interpersonal communications were between people of the same race and origin. However, this view is now outdated, as the world has become globalised and international business and migrant workers have made any community a global village. In this context, an understanding of a foreign country’s history would enable future local workers to reinforce the relationship between them and the expatriates from that country.
In addition, I am strongly convinced that children would benefit the most only when the learning of local history is placed parallel to that of world history. To understand a local historical event, children should put the regional and sometimes even world context in that historical era into consideration. For example, children should acknowledge that the event that Vietnam regained its independence after defeating the Japanese troops in Indochina in 1945 only happened after a series of relevant events in the World War II, one of which is the surrender of Japan to the Allies. In this way of learning, children would understand history more deeply and thoroughly.
All the existing data has provided a concrete foundation that the study of local history should always be parallel to that of world history. This practice would guarantee that children learn history more comprehensively and be able to tighten the bond with migrant workers in their country.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, may, so, for example, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 7.30460921844 205% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 24.0 24.0651302605 100% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 41.998997996 83% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalization wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1572.0 1615.20841683 97% => OK
No of words: 296.0 315.596192385 94% => OK
Chars per words: 5.31081081081 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14784890444 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87548230146 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 158.0 176.041082164 90% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.533783783784 0.561755894193 95% => OK
syllable_count: 490.5 506.74238477 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.384769539078 0% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.53597841 49.4020404114 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.285714286 106.682146367 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.1428571429 20.7667163134 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.0 7.06120827912 42% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 3.4128256513 176% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.288316814823 0.244688304435 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.114206170413 0.084324248473 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0966542255479 0.0667982634062 145% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.205534755305 0.151304729494 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.085597885779 0.056905535591 150% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 13.0946893788 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.4159519038 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.0 8.58950901804 105% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 78.4519038076 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.