Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
According to the author “Educational institutions should discourage students from pursuing concentrations if evidence suggests that a student is unlikely to succeed.” While some elements of the above statement seem plausible, the statement fails to recognize that past performances is not an accurate indicator of success as certain variables may limit or further educational success. Despite evidence of poor performance, motivating a student will ensure a learner’s chance at success.
First, as learners, we do not pursue things because we know that the likelihood of success is certain, we do so because we want to expand our scope and knowledge about a particular field. Should an institution seek to dissuade a student for reasons unknown, the commitment that an establishment has for its students is compromised. Let’s imagine, Student A historically has underperformed throughout their high school career and has been evidenced to show poor performance. Data may show a below average GPA for the student; however, data doesn’t take into consideration the student’s problematic home life and how it has deeply prohibited the learner’s learning abilities. With little to no additional information pertaining to a student’s external circumstance, Institutions can not accurately assess the likelihood of a success and should therefore commit to supporting all its students despite past performance.
Furthermore, Institutions should motivate its students to fearlessly pursue any field of study; it is only when the studying begins does the pursuant discern to continue with gumption or to explore other field. Let’s think about a well known methodology used often in the Technology Startup Space, the Lean Principle. The Lean principle encourages the process of testing an idea, product, or theory with a sampling of your target audience. Once the testing is complete, you extrapolate key pieces of information that informs you whether you are progressing nicely. This approach is analogous to allowing students to explore the field of choice and then make a decision based on direct evidence on whether the studies are too challenging or just right for them.
In contrast, we can argue, “ Knowingly allowing a student with limited programme insight to pursue increasingly challenging coursework would be a disservice to the learner”. While, the argument recognizes that student success is critical, a bigger disservice is in not encouraging students to fully tap into their unrealized potential. When a student lacks pertinent information or insight at any given point, an opportunity is created for the academy to quickly provide access to pertinent information so the pupil can make an informed decision.
So, institutions have the responsibility of encouraging all students to explore their area of interest despite some record of past performances; moreover, students must be encouraged to pursue their field of choice and be given the space to realize if success is in the works; and only then should an institution be allowed to provide alternative areas of studies to its scholars.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 260, Rule ID: ADVERB_WORD_ORDER[9]
Message: The adverb 'often' is usually put before the verb 'used'.
Suggestion: often used
...;s think about a well known methodology used often in the Technology Startup Space, the Le...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, so, then, therefore, well, while, as for, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.4196629213 105% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 28.0 33.0505617978 85% => OK
Preposition: 65.0 58.6224719101 111% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 12.9106741573 163% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2685.0 2235.4752809 120% => OK
No of words: 480.0 442.535393258 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.59375 5.05705443957 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68069463864 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.3079705668 2.79657885939 118% => OK
Unique words: 256.0 215.323595506 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.533333333333 0.4932671777 108% => OK
syllable_count: 841.5 704.065955056 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.740449438202 135% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.2370786517 79% => 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: 30.0 23.0359550562 130% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 82.6110757934 60.3974514979 137% => OK
Chars per sentence: 167.8125 118.986275619 141% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.0 23.4991977007 128% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.3125 5.21951772744 121% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.83258426966 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.178207204427 0.243740707755 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0598584275176 0.0831039109588 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0437381291154 0.0758088955206 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.107269968509 0.150359130593 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0363120889563 0.0667264976115 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.9 14.1392134831 141% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 24.11 48.8420337079 49% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.92365168539 164% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 17.4 12.1743820225 143% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.73 12.1639044944 129% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.12 8.38706741573 121% => OK
difficult_words: 152.0 100.480337079 151% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 20.5 11.8971910112 172% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 11.2143820225 125% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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.