The government should invest more money in teaching science than in other subjects for a country's development and progress. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It is appreciated that the governor should allocate more to teaching science-based subjects compared to others for the sake of national development and progress. From my perspective, I completely agree with this opinion. This essay would pen down valid justifications behind my verdict.
Initially, I opine that spending the public purse on science lessons would exert a positive impact on students’ cognitive development and logical thinking, thus contributing to a better future workforce. This is mainly derived from the fact that, unlike other subjects, science often require learners to do complicated calculations and explain complex processes, which sharpens their minds and boosts the speed of reactions to the surrounding environment. According to recent research by the Ministry of Education and Training in Vietnam, frequent Maths learners generally improvise faster in hazardous situations than those who do not. Should science-based subjects be overlooked, students will not possess both indispensable knowledge and traits to be in the labour force and devote to the national prosperity.
Besides, I hold a strong belief that teaching science subjects should be governmentally funded more as they are the basis of technological development, which is the driving force of many important industries. This is mainly due to the fact that technology is wholly developed from basic science, such as maths and biology. For example, Python, a well-known programming language is based on a host of algorithms. Also, thanks to chemistry and physics, metal detectors were invented. Therefore, pouring governmental funds into teaching science-based subjects would do wonders for industrial development in particular and national development in general. By contrast, if teaching science subjects were not funded, a nation would not witness any technological advancement.
In conclusion, as for the aforementioned explanations, I concur that the country leaders should invest more in teaching science-based subjects to benefit the national development and progress as these subjects would nurture a potential workforce and contribute to developing imperative industries.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-01-20 | Nicole Yu | 84 | view |
| 2022-03-03 | lennie.butera | 84 | view |
| 2022-03-01 | lennie.butera | 84 | view |
| 2021-09-10 | samdilnura | 89 | view |
| 2021-02-24 | driverhiepkhachvnteam | 78 | view |
- More companies have opened working areas without walls or barriers on their desks Do the disadvantages of open plan offices outweigh the advantages 61
- Some people think that the most important thing about being rich is it gives a person the opportunity to help other people Do you agree or disagree 61
- The chart below shows changes in exporting goods in a country in 2009 and 2010 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 11
- Some people focus on news in their country while others think it is more important to be aware of international news Discuss both views and give your opinion 84
- It is not up to our doctors to keep us healthy we should do it ourselves How far do you agree or disagree with this statement 74
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 101, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[1]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
...ts should be governmentally funded more as they are the basis of technological dev...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, if, look, so, therefore, thus, well, as for, for example, in conclusion, in general, in particular, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 41.998997996 88% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 8.3376753507 216% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1873.0 1615.20841683 116% => OK
No of words: 318.0 315.596192385 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.88993710692 5.12529762239 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22286093782 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.25768709617 2.80592935109 116% => OK
Unique words: 191.0 176.041082164 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.600628930818 0.561755894193 107% => OK
syllable_count: 561.6 506.74238477 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => 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: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 70.0045552454 49.4020404114 142% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.785714286 106.682146367 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.7142857143 20.7667163134 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.07142857143 7.06120827912 128% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.331034029314 0.244688304435 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.105733595844 0.084324248473 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.105724999772 0.0667982634062 158% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.220646458036 0.151304729494 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0675401491017 0.056905535591 119% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.7 13.0946893788 135% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 50.2224549098 64% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.18 12.4159519038 138% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.59 8.58950901804 123% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 78.4519038076 150% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.