Some people think that real-life skills like cooking housekeeping and gardening should be included in the curriculum as compulsory subjects. Do you agree or disagree?
In recent times, it is undeniable that the world is changing in such a dynamic way that many aspects of life have become inextricably intertwined in this development, including education. Stances are indicating that soft skills like cooking, housekeeping, and gardening should be made fundamental at school. From my perspective, I am of the opinion of this statement for a host of reasons which will be further elucidated in this essay.
To commence with, it should not be overlooked that integrating those aforementioned soft skills into the academic curricula might have a negative impact on the time management of students. To specify, the ubiquity of attending extra classes has rendered students tiring and worn out; were they required to take up those soft-skills teaching classes, it is highly probable that they are snowed under with a bigger assortment of homework and assignments. However, others might argue with this by pointing out that learners can view those classes as recreational activities and enjoy them to the fullest. But if learners are not cut out for cooking scrumptious-looking dishes, or planting seeds and trees in the beginning, they would not find these helpful and enjoyable.
Nevertheless, classes focusing on real-life skills as such may help children to accumulate a reservoir of knowledge in many spheres like biology or cooking in general. Courtesy of the practicality of those subjects, it may do wonders for students’ later life. When they reach adulthood, these skills will help them to lead a decent life. Without these skills, life will become less colorful and more expensive by virtue of the lack of cooking skills or the interest in the world of flora and fauna. In addition, students might have a chance to expand their social circle since they could meet someone with the same interests. What is more, students may find out their aptitude for creating new species, or a passion for making culinary delights, and cater to many people’s palate. Unlike in the past when chefs or gardeners might not be considered noble jobs, nowadays, these jobs have become more ubiquitous and receiving more desirable salaries.
In conclusion, by shedding light on these examples, it is crystal clear that including soft skills in the school curriculum can positively affect children in many ways. All things considered, I stand by the idea that cooking or gardening skills should be made fundamental. That way students can reach their fullest potentials.
- The maps below show a beachfront area in Australia in 1950 and today Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 64
- The charts show where people get their news and how much they trust these sources Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 84
- The table below shows the proportion of different categories of families living in poverty in Australia in 1999 78
- The graph shows data about the average Saturday sales of two bakeries in London in 2010 78
- The bar chart shows the percentage of young people in higher education in 2000 2005 and 2010 80
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, look, may, nevertheless, so, in addition, in conclusion, in general, what is more
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 7.85571142285 229% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 17.0 10.4138276553 163% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 7.30460921844 164% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 24.0651302605 166% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 59.0 41.998997996 140% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2097.0 1615.20841683 130% => OK
No of words: 402.0 315.596192385 127% => OK
Chars per words: 5.21641791045 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.47771567384 4.20363070211 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88060238531 2.80592935109 103% => OK
Unique words: 227.0 176.041082164 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.564676616915 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 636.3 506.74238477 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 5.43587174349 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 0.809619238477 618% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.6929336166 49.4020404114 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.352941176 106.682146367 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6470588235 20.7667163134 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.82352941176 7.06120827912 82% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.199823192257 0.244688304435 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0661406229349 0.084324248473 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0582938024341 0.0667982634062 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125741790064 0.151304729494 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.042064922296 0.056905535591 74% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 13.0946893788 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 50.2224549098 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.4159519038 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.41 8.58950901804 110% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 78.4519038076 150% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.5 9.78957915832 169% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => 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.