At some universities, students are required to take part in making decisions about the issues that affect daily life of everyone on campus, such as how many hours that the libraries should be open each day or what kinds of food should be served in the cafeteria. But at some universities, experts are hired to make these decisions, students are almost never involved. Which approach do you prefer and why?
To make students convenient, some universities hire experts to make decisions that affect students’ daily life on campus, while others require students to participate in those decisions. I hold opinion that universities can require students to make those decisions but not hire experts to do those decisions because this will have several positive effects on universities and students.
Admittedly, experts can make better decisions and help students save time. Experts know what can benefit students, making decisions to make students convenient. To be more concise, experts can help students decide which dishes should be served in the cafeteria. For instance, experts can ask the cafeteria to offer leafy greens such as cabbage, lettuce, and spinach. These foods provide students with natural fiber and will aid digestion. Also, students can focus on their studies and personal business without having to worry about other things. By contrast, if students had to make decisions by themselves, they would lose time studying and attending clubs.
Nevertheless, experts don’t understand students, even if the decisions they make are better, so universities should not hire experts to help students make decisions. Experts can help students make healthy conscious choices in the campus’s cafeteria, but students may be unwilling to accept the decisions and eat the food experts suggest. For example, if experts mandate that all dishes in the cafeteria be leafy greens and prohibit all fast food, I would choose not to eat food in the cafeteria, and instead eat outside because I enjoy fast food despite knowing it is unhealthy.
Second, if universities ask students to make decisions, this can help universities save money and make use of the money to attract more students. Universities should not waste money hiring experts to do such simple things that students can deal with. On one hand, a lot of equipment in schools is out-of-date, so if schools can renew the equipment and refurbish classrooms, schools will attract more students; on the other hand, doing so needs a great deal of money. Thus, universities can let students make decisions instead of relying on experts, and save a ton of money for refurbishing universities.
Last but not least, if students do not depend on experts, they can promote autonomy and practice critical thinking, so universities can let students make the decisions. Universities are not only a place to study, but also a place to learn practical skills. When students are able to get involved in things like decision making, they will have more chances to strengthen self-efficacy and develop critical thinking. Furthermore, if students can engage in those decisions, this will allow them to easily find a job and excel in their future careers. By contrast, if students overly depend on experts, they will lose many opportunities to further develop practical skills. Consequently, if universities require students to make those decisions, this will help students secure employment because students with critical thinking will be excellent compared to others.
To sum up, universities can let students make decisions about their daily life on campus because experts don’t know what students want, because schools can save money, and because students can develop critical thinking. Hence, I believe that universities have to let students make those decisions but not hire experts to help students make those decisions.
- People s behavior is largely determined by forces not of their own making 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 reas 58
- People s behavior is largely determined by forces not of their own making 66
- Reading Humans have long been fascinated by elephants the largest land animal in the modern world Social animals that live in herds elephants are native to both Africa and Asia Their large ears long trunk and long life span have made elephants one of the 80
- We learn our most valuable lessons in life from struggling with our limitations rather than from enjoying our successes Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim In developing and supporting your positi 66
- The effectiveness of a country s leaders is best measured by examining the well being of that country s citizens 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 s 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 254, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s choices in the campus’s cafeteria, but students may be unwilling to accept the ...
^^
Line 5, column 581, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t food despite knowing it is unhealthy. Second, if universities ask students to ...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 605, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...of money for refurbishing universities. Last but not least, if students do not d...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, furthermore, hence, if, may, nevertheless, second, so, then, thus, while, for example, for instance, such as, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 15.1003584229 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 31.0 9.8082437276 316% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 21.0 13.8261648746 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.0286738351 63% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 32.0 43.0788530466 74% => OK
Preposition: 65.0 52.1666666667 125% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.0752688172 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2931.0 1977.66487455 148% => OK
No of words: 545.0 407.700716846 134% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37798165138 4.8611393121 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.83169070408 4.48103885553 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80318334798 2.67179642975 105% => OK
Unique words: 226.0 212.727598566 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.414678899083 0.524837075471 79% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 891.9 618.680645161 144% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 9.59856630824 115% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 11.0 3.51792114695 313% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 6.0 1.86738351254 321% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.6003584229 117% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.7357999537 48.9658058833 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.125 100.406767564 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.7083333333 20.6045352989 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.79166666667 5.45110844103 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.53405017921 132% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 18.0 11.8709677419 152% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.248191368323 0.236089414692 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0972270936489 0.076458572812 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0624396919834 0.0737576698707 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.165652253283 0.150856017488 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0431627722839 0.0645574589148 67% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 11.7677419355 130% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 58.1214874552 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.1575268817 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.22 10.9000537634 130% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.74 8.01818996416 97% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 86.8835125448 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.