Some people say that in all levels of education, from primary schools to universities, too much time is spent on learning facts and not enough on learning practical skills.
Do you agree or disagree?
Generations ago, the global education system has not been subjected to any deviations and stayed immutable for many years. Nevertheless, it has undergone dramatic changes over the past decade. Furthermore, many people argue that as a result of these changes an overwhelming majority of time started to be occupied for studying theoretical facts and that learning of practical skills is neglected. This essay aims to investigate the mentioned view and present the crucial reasons as to why it is entirely unacceptable.
On the one hand, it is claimed that the reorientation of the entire system of teaching focusing on theoretical aspects, is substantially beneficial for the global community. In other words, the prioritization of studying theory has become more prevalent in the education system. Moreover, a paper published by Dr. Charles Watson, a world-renowned sociologist, reveals that 27% of young individuals, who obtained theoretical knowledge only, are more prosperous and dramatically more efficient at making work. Therefore, this instance has bolstered the existing belief that acquiring practical skills is not necessary and futile in its nature.
Despite the established opinion that theory teaching is significantly important and that practical skills can be ignored is absolutely incorrect. That is to say, that individuals' practical abilities drastically contribute to the worldwide economic and scientific development. It can be illustrated by the latest research, conducted by the Harvard University, which elucidated the fact that there has been a sharp decline in the number of economic and scientific growth due to the lack of specialists which had practical skills. Overall, the idea that practical skills are irrelevant is ill-informed and dangerous in itself and could potentially lead to a far worse outcome for the society.
This essay argued, that obtaining practical knowledge is essential and that in all levels of education it should not be neglected. In my opinion, I admit that nowadays theoretical teaching prevails over practical studying, however, it is absolutely inappropriate and preposterous and should be altered in the nearest future.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-07 | sanjugohel | 73 | view |
| 2019-11-28 | amanda.mosby | 11 | view |
| 2019-11-28 | amanda.mosby | 11 | view |
| 2019-11-09 | Tejwani | 11 | view |
| 2019-11-08 | Tejwani | 73 | view |
- Although more and more people read news on the Internet, newspapers will remain the most important source of news. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 73
- Some people say that in all levels of education, from primary schools to universities, too much time is spent on learning facts and not enough on learning practical skills.Do you agree or disagree? 78
- Some employers want to be able to contact their staff at all times, even on holidays. Does this development have more advantages than disadvantages? 73
- Smacking children is the best form of discipline.To what extent do you agree or disagree? 78
- Many people believe that road quality safety will be improved when the government will decrease the speed limit, other people believe that there are other ways of improving road safety.Discuss both views and give your opinion. Provide some examples from y 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, however, if, moreover, nevertheless, so, therefore, as to, as a result, in my opinion, in other words, that is to say
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 13.1623246493 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 7.30460921844 233% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 28.0 24.0651302605 116% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 41.998997996 86% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1859.0 1615.20841683 115% => OK
No of words: 330.0 315.596192385 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.63333333333 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.26214759535 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.22009444962 2.80592935109 115% => OK
Unique words: 187.0 176.041082164 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.566666666667 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 585.9 506.74238477 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 5.43587174349 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.4349447976 49.4020404114 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.785714286 106.682146367 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5714285714 20.7667163134 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.64285714286 7.06120827912 137% => 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: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.106604023263 0.244688304435 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0334630811164 0.084324248473 40% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0421276286832 0.0667982634062 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0614627027607 0.151304729494 41% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0292897113409 0.056905535591 51% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.9 13.0946893788 129% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 50.2224549098 62% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.67 12.4159519038 126% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.14 8.58950901804 118% => OK
difficult_words: 112.0 78.4519038076 143% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.