It is suggested that primary children should learn how to grow vegetables and keep animals. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?
There has been a colossal upsurge in discussing whether the elementary students should or should not be taught how to seed plants and interact with animals. While it is obvious that the science subjects are more essential than the mentioned lessons, I personally opine that the experiences we can earn from these pragmatic lessons far outweigh the negative influence and will draw my rational conclusion in the following paragraph.
First and foremost, it is evident that practical skills are necessary for our daily life. It plays a pivotal role in navigating personality and augmenting one's knowledge. The person who has awareness of planting vegetables and keeping animals might survive in any difficult circumstance. Secondly, exploring these hands-on experiences can help us widen our horizons and appreciate the value of nature. Children can use their time for meaningful activities such as growing seeds and caring for pets in order to be sociable and appreciate the beauty of nature. Thirdly, these lessons are proved to help people stay away from stress and tension instead of playing video games. Once partaking in planting vegetables and contact with animals, people can have more chances to mitigate their sedentary lifestyles and stay active every single day.
To be precise, teaching students in terms of vegetables and animals at initial age can fill their knowledge gap. Noticeably, the elementary can help the basic perception of nutrition and make a wise choice to set up a healthy regimen. Moreover, growing vegetables and communicating with animals can establish an underlying knowledge for students which can boost their creativity and innovation. Perhaps the best example of this would be Holland, this country concentrates on these pragmatic lessons in order to create an enjoyable studying environment that does not only relieve the stress from school time but also make children have more inspiration in discovering the novel things. That is the reason why this nation hosted a top rank in education across the globe whereas the school time is less than in other countries. However, if we spend a whole time on these realistic lessons, we don't have enough spare time for the other vital subjects such as math, literacy, etc. Admittedly, this pragmatic lecture can cost the school an arm and a leg in organizing and operating and even don't allocate enough time for other subjects.
In conclusion. two sides are associated with everything: one positive and one negative point. It all stated that the suggestion about organizing more programs for elementary students in terms of plants and animals can bring more benefits than disadvantages it has. I wholeheartedly give a green light to the above statement and believe that schools should spur these activities to raise primary students' consciousness about nature.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 891, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...ole time on these realistic lessons, we dont have enough spare time for the other vi...
^^^^
Line 5, column 1086, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...eg in organizing and operating and even dont allocate enough time for other subjects...
^^^^
Line 7, column 16, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Two
...e for other subjects. In conclusion. two sides are associated with everything: o...
^^^
Line 7, column 396, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'students'' or 'student's'?
Suggestion: students'; student's
... spur these activities to raise primary students consciousness about nature.
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, whereas, while, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 7.85571142285 204% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 23.0 10.4138276553 221% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 24.0651302605 145% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 47.0 41.998997996 112% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2394.0 1615.20841683 148% => OK
No of words: 453.0 315.596192385 144% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.28476821192 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.61343653406 4.20363070211 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78548011364 2.80592935109 99% => OK
Unique words: 256.0 176.041082164 145% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.565121412804 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 753.3 506.74238477 149% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 5.43587174349 184% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 16.0721442886 118% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.2344378242 49.4020404114 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.0 106.682146367 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.8421052632 20.7667163134 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.15789473684 7.06120827912 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.01903807615 80% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 3.4128256513 176% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.130471341765 0.244688304435 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0355327223555 0.084324248473 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0432992768926 0.0667982634062 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.079800105443 0.151304729494 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0158900017757 0.056905535591 28% => 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: 15.4 13.0946893788 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 50.2224549098 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.64 12.4159519038 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.13 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 125.0 78.4519038076 159% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.