In contemporary society, where rarely is the university education underestimated by a country, it comes as no surprise that elevating the effectiveness of the management has always been the university presidents' top priorities. A simple recognition of this argument leads our discussion to the controversial issue of the mechanism for decision making. Some adhere to the belief that students should play a pivotal role in formulating the profound policies. An alternative strategy competing with it is to employ experts to make the decisions. I am inclined to concur with the first idea, and in the ensuing paragraphs the rationale behind the statement will be further elaborated.
The foremost factor tipping the competitive advantage away from the latter toward the former is the efficiency. It goes with saying that students who are affected by the policies are possessed with clearer awareness of their merits and demerits. As a consequence, they can identify the root cause of the problems without striking a blow and appropriate actions can be immediately taken. On the contrary, the professional managers suffer from the crippling deficiency of the personal experience of the impact of the policy. To compensate for the lack of experience, only after conducting a prolonged survey can they make the adjustment. Enduring the harmful influence inevitably engenders a substantial number of complaints among students, which probably hinders the school from enrolling more preeminent students.
Anthor reason that deserves attention is that involving students is a more economical approach. As is often a case, juvenile students are more than likely to work temporarily for the collage with a few, if any, wages thanks to their bountiful leisure time and low life pressure. Furthermore, since the work experience in the school is regraded as a precious opportunity to prepare themselves for the future career rather than a mean of substance, they can still exert themselves even with modest material rewards. In contrast, the full-time employee will strain the university's budget for their real-life need. It is the high salary that serves as the best incentive to stimulate them to dedicate themselves to tackling the campus issues and working out a plan leading to a promising future.
With all the above factors taken into consideration, we can logically reach the conclusion that it is more advisable for the universities to engage students instead of the specialists. After all, it undoubtedly lays a stepping stone toward an efficient decision-making process and low stress on the finance.
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: it's better to make friends with intelligent people than with people who have a sense of humor? 86
- At some universities, students take part in making decisions about the issues that affect daily life of everyone on campus such as how many hours the libraries should be open each day or what kinds of food should be served in the cafeteria. But at some un 80
- Your friend has the opportunity to choose either one of two types of majors (fields of study), which one of the following two majors do you think is a better choice, and why?A major that would allow him to finish years of study and get a degree sooner (so 3
- The government can take a variety of actions to help protect the environment Which one of the following do you think is the most important for the nation s government to take to protect the environment 1 Found research to develop environmentally friendl 65
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: it's better to make friends with intelligent people than with people who have a sense of humor? 90
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 32, Rule ID: ADVERB_WORD_ORDER[4]
Message: The adverb 'rarely' is usually put after the verb 'is'.
Suggestion: is rarely
In contemporary society, where rarely is the university education underestimated...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, if, so, still, after all, in contrast, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 15.1003584229 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 9.8082437276 92% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 13.8261648746 43% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.0286738351 91% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 43.0788530466 63% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 52.1666666667 107% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.0752688172 186% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2201.0 1977.66487455 111% => OK
No of words: 408.0 407.700716846 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.39460784314 4.8611393121 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49433085973 4.48103885553 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07585344633 2.67179642975 115% => OK
Unique words: 248.0 212.727598566 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.607843137255 0.524837075471 116% => OK
syllable_count: 702.0 618.680645161 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 9.59856630824 83% => OK
Article: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6003584229 87% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.1383433463 48.9658058833 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.277777778 100.406767564 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6666666667 20.6045352989 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.11111111111 5.45110844103 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 11.8709677419 51% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 3.85842293907 233% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.102545765552 0.236089414692 43% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0302530517794 0.076458572812 40% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0304536780612 0.0737576698707 41% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0586403304382 0.150856017488 39% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0261700351559 0.0645574589148 41% => 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: 15.3 11.7677419355 130% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 58.1214874552 70% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 10.1575268817 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.28 10.9000537634 131% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.49 8.01818996416 131% => OK
difficult_words: 149.0 86.8835125448 171% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 10.002688172 125% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.