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 types of universities courses and its corresponding impacts has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of practical training is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that learning technical lessons can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, practical courses can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that the merits of knowing new professions as well as more job opportunities are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered skilled graduates. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both technical knowledge and finding a suitable career apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of science, theoretical knowledge might increase the consequences of unqualified students. Moreover, fundamental aspects of cognitive skills could relate to this reality that the demerits of studying books pertain to lack of practical abilities. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of unemployment is correlated negatively with universities' teaching methods. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of the educational system.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the pros of practical training far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of being professional prove the significance of valuable degree, but also pinpoint useful knowledge 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 : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 31.9359605911 103% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.75862068966 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1500.0 1207.87684729 124% => OK
No of words: 259.0 242.827586207 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.79150579151 5.00649968141 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01166760082 3.92707691288 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.30156243998 2.71678728327 122% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 139.433497537 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.675675675676 0.580463131201 116% => OK
syllable_count: 472.5 379.143842365 125% => 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: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => 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: 21.0 20.5024630542 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.8175990094 50.4703680194 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.0 104.977214359 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5833333333 20.9669160288 103% => 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 : 5.0 6.9802955665 72% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 2.75862068966 109% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.184771183233 0.242375264174 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0523061446697 0.0925447433944 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0292856110497 0.071462118173 41% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0961208290445 0.151781067708 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0183011875659 0.0609392437508 30% => 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: 16.6 12.6369458128 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.24 53.1260098522 63% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 10.9458128079 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.3 11.5310837438 141% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.02 8.32886699507 132% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 55.0591133005 189% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.94827586207 146% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.3980295567 100% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.5123152709 162% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 72.0 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.