Theoretical subjects such as mathematics and philosophy are taught in universities but students prefer more practical subjects such as accounting and computer programming. Some people believe theoretical subjects should be abandoned in universities. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Lately, the content of the curriculum in some universities is becoming a topic of public interest. There is a school of thought holds that the theoretical subjects should be removed from the curriculum because the student’s preferences are practical lessons. Although this belief has many benefits, I am convinced that it does more harm than good.
There are many compelling advantages of abandoning mathematics and philosophy in the university. Firstly, thanks for reducing the number of subjects, students can ease the colossal study pressure, which leads to depression, even suicides. Secondly, instead of learning something which is considered useless, they have a chance to spend their time and attempt to widen knowledge and practical skills in their main major. Moreover, spare time is also used for other purposes, such as: doing a part-time job for income, traveling and exploring new activities as a recreational purpose and enlarging their grasp.
Notwithstanding the aforementioned advantages, removing theoretical subjects can have a huge adverse bearing on students as well as society. It can be easily observed that modern science, technology, and utilities are the results of historical theories, which are contained in theoretical subjects. Learning these kinds of subjects acts as a precursor to the deep understanding of the origins of both advanced devices and social problems. Moreover, seizing all these theories is a major contributor for students to easily figure out the solutions in practical circumstances.
In conclusion, absorbing all the meanings of theoretical subjects is a vital determinant in which students can apply these things to pressing problems and practical programs. I am totally convinced that universities shouldn’t remove theoretical subjects from the curriculum
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, moreover, second, secondly, so, well, in conclusion, such as, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 41.998997996 67% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 8.3376753507 12% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1545.0 1615.20841683 96% => OK
No of words: 273.0 315.596192385 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.65934065934 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06481385082 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.16669579684 2.80592935109 113% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 176.041082164 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.604395604396 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 476.1 506.74238477 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => 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: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.5580046784 49.4020404114 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.846153846 106.682146367 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0 20.7667163134 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.61538461538 7.06120827912 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
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: 0.29906310942 0.244688304435 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0990689925665 0.084324248473 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0790996089468 0.0667982634062 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.181569860852 0.151304729494 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0759012168192 0.056905535591 133% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.7 13.0946893788 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.55 12.4159519038 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.83 8.58950901804 114% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 78.4519038076 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.7795591182 148% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.