School administrators at an elementary school have recently decided to increase the amount of hours spent teaching kids about robotics, computer programming, and other elements of science and technology. However, they were forced to reduce the amount of hours spent on teaching art and music. Do you agree or disagree with this new policy?
Opinions vary on that school districts' principals could enhance hours of technical, scientific, and computer classes at elementary school. While it is tempting to view hours of another class, for example, art, music, and other vibrant arts could be decreased.
Undoubtedly, modern children are tech-savvy and prefer to learn more about programming, computing, and robotics. However, this change could significantly influence young adults who prefer different development in their curricular activities. A huge range of resources confirms the idea that children and their parents should think about their children's future from kindergarten and elementary school. In surveys, teachers and representatives of the education department mention kids' willingness to discover new knowledge and experiment with the curriculum. Furthermore, our future is inextricably linked with the IT realm; that is why kids should be open to curiosity, exploration, and observation. Apparently, scientists predict not to experiment with the learning process in that way because we can lose future eminent artists, great musicians, and talented painters.
According to this topic, it would be unwise not to mention that we could recognize the power of our previous decisions after years and decades. In contrast, we should notice that the superintendents of elementary school could not have the power to change the curriculum without approval from the Teachers and Parents Association (PTA). Despite the onslaught of some parents, the elementary school principals should be very careful with science and technology classes, and I dare say that it will have far-reaching implications for all art and music lover students.
Equally important, diversity and inclusion are the mainstream of all education ministries. It can be one of the valid arguments to suggest that school districts prepare two options for children who prefer robotics, programming and who prefer art and music. Educators and school administrators should prepare all advantages and disadvantages of this solution and help adults decide about the studying process. Moreover, elementary education's primary goal is to build social, people, and emotional skills than tech skills.
All in all, it appears that schools could increase tech classes and decrease humanitarian subjects quickly. This would be addressing the problem of whether the elementary school has the power to make this decision or not; parents should verify the legality of this issue. At the same time, we should be cautious about decreasing hours from one syllabus to another.
- The chart below shows the changes in car ownership in Great britain between 1961 and 2001 61
- Living in large cities today poses many problems for people What are these problems Should governments encourage more people to live in smaller towns 84
- The chart illustrates changes in carbon emissions among several countries in 1975 1990 and 2005 73
- Is it more enjoyable to work only 3 days a week for short hours or to work 5 days a week for longer hours 80
- The chart below shows the results of a survey about people s coffee and tea buying habits in Australian cities
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 609, Rule ID: DT_PRP[1]
Message: Possible typo. Did you mean 'the' or 'IT'?
Suggestion: the; IT
... our future is inextricably linked with the IT realm; that is why kids should be open ...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Equally,
... for all art and music lover students. Equally important, diversity and inclusion are ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
apparently, furthermore, however, if, moreover, so, while, for example, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 15.1003584229 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 9.8082437276 184% => OK
Conjunction : 24.0 13.8261648746 174% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.0286738351 109% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 43.0788530466 72% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 52.1666666667 88% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.0752688172 173% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2199.0 1977.66487455 111% => OK
No of words: 390.0 407.700716846 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.63846153846 4.8611393121 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44391917772 4.48103885553 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97706441945 2.67179642975 111% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 212.727598566 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.561538461538 0.524837075471 107% => OK
syllable_count: 657.9 618.680645161 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 9.59856630824 94% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 7.0 1.86738351254 375% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6003584229 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.0356113432 48.9658058833 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.166666667 100.406767564 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.6666666667 20.6045352989 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.61111111111 5.45110844103 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 11.8709677419 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.185566886503 0.236089414692 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0584519535577 0.076458572812 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0558743820403 0.0737576698707 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113482160175 0.150856017488 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0428252962988 0.0645574589148 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 11.7677419355 136% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 58.1214874552 72% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 10.1575268817 125% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.43 10.9000537634 142% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.78 8.01818996416 122% => OK
difficult_words: 126.0 86.8835125448 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.002688172 90% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.0537634409 103% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.247311828 156% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.