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 claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
The writer makes a claim that educational institutions have a responsibility towards student to stop them from pursuing the field, in which they are not likely to succed. Author has made some unsupportive assertions without which his agrument is likely to fail. Therefore, I do not agree with writer that educational institutions have a responsibility to restrict the student towards pursuing any course of his/her choice.
First of all, writer has not mentioned any parameters on which it can be predicted that student is likely to fail. Without any certainity that the Institution's decision, regarding the student's future, is correct, it will be injustice to the student by restricting him to pursue the field of his interest. For example, a student who is equally talented in two feild, Maths and Arts, decided to pursue Arts, in this case his educational institution cannot predict that he is likely to fail in Arts as his marks in both the subject suggests that he will do equally good in both the fields. Clearly, this ambiguity in the decision making will in turn harm the student instead of benifiting him and thus, such restrictions should not be asserted by Institutions.
Furthermore, there are some incidents, where educational instutions have some idea about the fields that student have selected and have limited scope. There are high chances that future opputunities will dry up, in this case some people might argue, it is institution's place to disuade the student from pursuing those fields. For instance, in above citied example, university have some idea that government funding for major art courses will be scrapped off and by citing this reason, stops the student from taking Arts. Here, I would argue, even though institution have some idea about the future government funding, but still there are possibility that student will get some international funding or private scholarship and can succeed in future. Therefore, even though institutions having certain parameters on which they can disuade the student from taking a certain feild, there are chances, even though they might appear slim, that student will suceed in his field.
educational Instutions can ensure they provide correct guideline to Students, by asking for their preffered cources and enlightening them on the furture prospects. Morever, they can provide students with analysis, on which student can see for themselves, where do they stand in each of the their preffered field, and in which fields they are likely to succeed. even though, Student choose to persue the field which institution does not approve of, they should provide the student with all the support and coursed which will help student to succeed.
In conclusion, by disuading student from persuing their field of interest, without having fool-proof parameters of deciding their furture success, Institution may hamper their chances of actually student doing good in their field of interest. All intitutions can provide, is their support, guidences and neccessary councilling to ensure that student is on right path.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-29 | jenniferjack07 | 66 | view |
| 2020-01-27 | lanhhoang | 83 | view |
| 2020-01-23 | lanhhoang | 16 | view |
| 2020-01-22 | AkkineniAnuhya4 | 50 | view |
| 2020-01-20 | maneesha ch | 50 | view |
- The emergence of the online “blogosphere” and social media has significantly weakened the quality of political discourse in the United States. Reason: When anyone can publish political opinions easily, standards for covering news and political topics 62
- Nation should allow same curriculum before college. 50
- The emergence of the online “blogosphere” and social media has significantly weakened the quality of political discourse in the United States. Reason: When anyone can publish political opinions easily, standards for covering news and political topics 66
- 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 claim. In developing and suppo 62
- Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could. 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 739, Rule ID: IN_PAST[1]
Message: Did you mean: 'in the future'?
Suggestion: in the future
... or private scholarship and can succeed in future. Therefore, even though institutions ha...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Educational
...at student will suceed in his field. educational Instutions can ensure they provide corr...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 287, Rule ID: DT_PRP[1]
Message: Possible typo. Did you mean 'the' or 'their'?
Suggestion: the; their
...mselves, where do they stand in each of the their preffered field, and in which fields th...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 362, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Even
...hich fields they are likely to succeed. even though, Student choose to persue the fi...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, furthermore, if, may, regarding, so, still, therefore, thus, for example, for instance, in conclusion, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.4196629213 177% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 23.0 11.3162921348 203% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 51.0 33.0505617978 154% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 68.0 58.6224719101 116% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2595.0 2235.4752809 116% => OK
No of words: 491.0 442.535393258 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.28513238289 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70728369723 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75129457317 2.79657885939 98% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 215.323595506 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.446028513238 0.4932671777 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 783.9 704.065955056 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 11.0 4.38483146067 251% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.2370786517 84% => 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: 28.0 23.0359550562 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 46.0269215639 60.3974514979 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 152.647058824 118.986275619 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.8823529412 23.4991977007 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.05882352941 5.21951772744 154% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 5.13820224719 175% => 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: 0.308305686619 0.243740707755 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.124314718888 0.0831039109588 150% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0983760331202 0.0758088955206 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.200548688061 0.150359130593 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.102446446361 0.0667264976115 154% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.9 14.1392134831 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.06 48.8420337079 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.1743820225 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.99 12.1639044944 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.37 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 100.480337079 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 11.2143820225 118% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 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.