129. Educational institutions should actively encourage their students to choose fields of study in which jobs are plentiful.
This topic raises the controversial issue of whether educational institutions should actively encourage their students to choose filed of study in which jobs are plentiful.
Indisputably, the final goal of study is to provide student to have to apply for the job, therefore, when jobs of that field are plentiful, it’s best field for students to study.
Nevertheless, if most of our students go to study at the same field, then there might be insufficient occupation for this many of students. Thus, I generally disagree the opinion that student should study in some specific fields.
To begin with, I agreed with the idea that the purpose of education is to provide student with the ability to finish the job, therefore, whether fields have plentiful jobs or not is significantly important for students. To illustrate, let’s look at the example of artificial intelligence, which is a subject include inside the department of Computer Science. Since this field is growing rapidly years ago, the needed of computer science engineer also increase. In order to supply the demand of new employees, colleges and US government bolster students to study at Computer Science. As a result, the industries are benefit from increasing graduated students, and students don’t need to worry about finding jobs after graduated. Consequently, it is pretty obvious that the we should suggest our students to study in fields in which jobs are plentiful.
But it’s also worth considering that this virtuous cycle can’t sustain for a long time. Specifically, if most of our students go to study at specific field, then there might be insufficient occupation for this many of students. A good case would also be the fostering filed, artificial intelligence and machine learning. Recently, due to excessive supply of graduated students, while demand of industries remaining the same, some graduated students started can’t finding an occupation. Both common sense and consequences have told us we should contemplate our policy and strategy, that whether we should keep advocate some specific fields for student to study or not.
In conclusion, although study in a field which jobs or plentiful is prospective, but none of us will know when the demand of industries will dramatically decrease, or even the industries become waning. As long as some measurements are performed, or some area involved, we should suggest encourage our student to study at the field that they like. In fact, no matter how the industries become in the future, at least they love the job and the field.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-08-10 | Hanfeng Zhou | 66 | view |
| 2022-05-04 | kkboxc5173c | 66 | view |
| 2021-11-08 | Rahasya Barkur | 66 | view |
| 2021-09-10 | anguszz | 66 | view |
| 2021-08-01 | Ruth Ogboye | 50 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 769, Rule ID: DT_PRP[1]
Message: Possible typo. Did you mean 'the' or 'we'?
Suggestion: the; we
...Consequently, it is pretty obvious that the we should suggest our students to study in...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 464, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[4]
Message: The verb 'can't' requires base form of this verb: 'find'
Suggestion: find
..., some graduated students started can’t finding an occupation. Both common sense and co...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, if, look, nevertheless, so, then, therefore, thus, while, at least, in conclusion, in fact, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.4196629213 113% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 33.0505617978 97% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 58.6224719101 102% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2165.0 2235.4752809 97% => OK
No of words: 415.0 442.535393258 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.21686746988 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.51348521516 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88222990719 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 215.323595506 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.479518072289 0.4932671777 97% => OK
syllable_count: 660.6 704.065955056 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 3.10617977528 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.0043857118 60.3974514979 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.277777778 118.986275619 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0555555556 23.4991977007 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.94444444444 5.21951772744 152% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.409310095314 0.243740707755 168% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.131637886896 0.0831039109588 158% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.119689521339 0.0758088955206 158% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.253711631368 0.150359130593 169% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.125632103898 0.0667264976115 188% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.1392134831 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.8420337079 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.1639044944 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.28 8.38706741573 99% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 100.480337079 92% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.