Some people think that universities should not provide so much theoretical knowledge but give more practical training throughout their courses. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
Recently, the phenomenon of practical work rather than theoretical knowledge and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of providing more practical training is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe
that the effectiveness of practical training can be plus and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, acquiring knowledge by practical learning can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that merits of promoting the communication skills, as well as enhance their knowledge, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered the influence of practical learning in social and professional life. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both transferring the experience to others and having a devoted effort apparently can be seen.
From a realm of educational science, working in the workforce related to the course might increase the consequences of efficiency of an individual. As a tangible example, some academic research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that practical training provides students more deeper understanding about their course. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of beneficial practical training rather than relying only on theoretical knowledge.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of the practical work along with their study are indeed too great to ignore when it comes to expanding horizon and promoting the performance.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-20 | yasamin.gharib62 | 85 | view |
| 2019-07-28 | maryam2 | 80 | view |
| 2019-02-18 | MehdiKhodadadi | 88 | view |
| 2018-12-12 | arami | 88 | view |
| 2018-11-07 | Krishn Patel | 85 | view |
- University only requires applying digital media rather than continuously upgrading textbook Agree or disagree 83
- Whether design of building will have a positive or negative impact on people's life and work? 84
- Some people think placing advertisements in schools is a great resource for public schools that need additionally funding, but others think it exploits children by treating them as a captive audience for corporate sponsors. 85
- Should library use digital gadgets to provide information on different topics? Pros & Cons 88
- Some people believe that the sole aim of higher education to make people ready for employment.Agree or disagree. 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 367, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...of individuals. I am inclined to believe that the effectiveness of practical trai...
^^^
Line 6, column 289, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'deeper' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: deeper
...at practical training provides students more deeper understanding about their course. Hence...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
apparently, hence, if, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 6.10837438424 82% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 20.9802955665 91% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 31.9359605911 113% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.75862068966 139% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1526.0 1207.87684729 126% => OK
No of words: 267.0 242.827586207 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.71535580524 5.00649968141 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.04229324003 3.92707691288 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.23273265134 2.71678728327 119% => OK
Unique words: 162.0 139.433497537 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.606741573034 0.580463131201 105% => OK
syllable_count: 482.4 379.143842365 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.6157635468 108% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.931034482759 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 12.6551724138 79% => 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: 26.0 20.5024630542 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 47.884130983 50.4703680194 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 152.6 104.977214359 145% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.7 20.9669160288 127% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.6 7.25397266985 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.12807881773 121% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.33497536946 37% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 6.9802955665 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 2.75862068966 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.220131705626 0.242375264174 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0811705546251 0.0925447433944 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0551590352402 0.071462118173 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.11744322373 0.151781067708 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.034292142115 0.0609392437508 56% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.9 12.6369458128 150% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 28.17 53.1260098522 53% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 10.9458128079 144% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.19 11.5310837438 140% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.43 8.32886699507 125% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 55.0591133005 169% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.94827586207 146% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.3980295567 119% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.5123152709 152% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.5 Out of 90
---------------------
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.