Some industry leaders believe that children should learn computer programming in primary school
With computers such an integral part of our modern civilisation, the need to train new generations of skilled
programmers is irrefutable. However, I do not think this justifies teaching coding in primary school.
Obviously, the sooner children begin programming, the more knowledge and experience they are likely to
have by the time they reach university. Understandably, some in the IT industry call for lessons in coding at the
youngest possible age feeling that this will give domestic companies the edge over their international competitors.
However, any curriculum must be a compromise between what is ideal and what is possible given the financial
and scheduling constraints under which primary schools operate. Coding is no doubt a useful skill to have, but it
pales in comparison with learning how to read and write properly. Relatively few jobs require programming, but
a great many require literacy and numeracy, so this is obviously where the bulk of a primary school’s precious
resources must be spent.
Furthermore, in primary schools, each class generally has a single teacher responsible for teaching all subjects.
They have long been required to teach elementary mathematics and English, but programming will be a skill
that many of them do not possess. There is no way to bridge this gap that does not require the considerable
time and expense of either rehiring new teachers or retraining old ones. By waiting until children enter high
school, it is possible to ensure that they learn programming from dedicated specialists.
To sum up, although there are potential benefits to teaching computer programming at primary school, these
are clearly outweighed by the disadvantages, and so on balance, I am against the idea.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 65, Rule ID: DT_PRP[1]
Message: Possible typo. Did you mean 'the' or 'IT'?
Suggestion: the; IT
...ach university. Understandably, some in the IT industry call for lessons in coding at ...
^^^^^^
Line 18, column 50, Rule ID: AFFORD_VBG[1]
Message: This verb is used with infinitive: 'to program', 'to programme'.
Suggestion: to program; to programme
...t is possible to ensure that they learn programming from dedicated specialists. To sum u...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, however, if, so, no doubt, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 41.998997996 81% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 8.3376753507 36% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1503.0 1615.20841683 93% => OK
No of words: 277.0 315.596192385 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.42599277978 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07962216107 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.06372517 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 176.041082164 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.638989169675 0.561755894193 114% => OK
syllable_count: 457.2 506.74238477 90% => 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
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 0.809619238477 618% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.654144373 49.4020404114 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.25 106.682146367 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0833333333 20.7667163134 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.5 7.06120827912 64% => OK
Paragraphs: 17.0 4.38176352705 388% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.222455526209 0.244688304435 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.072858766308 0.084324248473 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0535123197702 0.0667982634062 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0608839089686 0.151304729494 40% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0602466674478 0.056905535591 106% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.7 13.0946893788 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 50.2224549098 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.51 12.4159519038 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.11 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 78.4519038076 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum five paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.