Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed.
Many educational institutions today allow students the freedom to choose their area of study. In fact, students have full autonomy in taking classes in the subject matters where they want to focus their time and energy on. Although some may argue that these choices result in wasted time and energy when the student eventually fails at a higher level, it is not wise for the institution to take the initiative to dissuade individuals from taking certain classes.
At first, it may seem that educational institutions do have a duty to discourage students from pursuing areas in which they are unlikely to succeed. Proponents of this ideology would argue that an institution, in acting in accordance with each student’s best interest, should convince them only to proceed in certain disciplines in order to save time and money. Since many students struggle with financial difficulty while attending one of these prestigious universities, causing them to take out loans, work a part time job, or ask friends and family members for assistance, ensuring that the student is only pursuing a field in which they are capable is of the utmost importance. In addition, if they are able to finish their studies early due to not wasting time attempting a major that is not their strength, they can immediately start working a full time job and making income to support themselves or to pay back student loans.
However, this point of view assumes that the educational institution has perfect foresight into where a student can or can not succeed. This evaluation is quite subjective, and can easily differ depending on which instructor, dean, or principal is determining the student’s qualifications. In addition, the examination of a student’s abilities may not take into account his or her past, as well as future potential. Students can come from a plethora of backgrounds, with a wide variety in family history, availability of resources, and previous educational experiences. Even adjusting for factors that may hinder a student’s initial assessment of talent, there is a notion that some children may simply be more precocious, while others develop their abilities later on in life. Therefore, an institution simply cannot determine the success of a student in any particular field, or hope to predict their acme in that subject.
Even if we were to entertain the notion of the prescience of these institutions, we are still neglecting that fact that some students may simply want to be well rounded and explore other subject areas. In fact, exposure to a broad range of knowledge may buttress a student’s overall success in the future. A statistics major may not be strong in English and therefore may not succeed at the higher levels, but a few writing classes may bolster his abilities to communicate his findings later on as a statistician. Similarly, a prodigious pianist may not find his greatest strength in mathematics, but an understanding of the underlying harmonic tones through musical wavelengths may nicely complement his understanding of music theory.
Due to the high degree of subjectivity of determining the aptitude of students in a certain field of study, particularly without a thorough understanding of their history, institutions should not dissuade any student from pursuing any major. While exploring different areas, well rounded individuals are developed, who can in fact be even more successful than their narrowly focused counterparts. In fact, as different disciplines are becoming more intertwined, a vast breadth of knowledge may be essential to success in any line of work.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-29 | jenniferjack07 | 66 | view |
| 2020-01-28 | Kiho Park | 50 | view |
| 2020-01-27 | lanhhoang | 83 | view |
| 2020-01-23 | lanhhoang | 16 | view |
| 2020-01-22 | AkkineniAnuhya4 | 50 | view |
- Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed. 66
- Claim: In any field—business, politics, education, government—those in power should step down after five years. 66
- Governments should focus on solving the immediate problems of today rather than on trying to solve the anticipated problems of the future. 58
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. 50
- In most professions and academic fields, imagination is more important than knowledge. 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 517, Rule ID: EN_COMPOUNDS
Message: This word is normally spelled with hyphen.
Suggestion: part-time
... causing them to take out loans, work a part time job, or ask friends and family members ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 856, Rule ID: EN_COMPOUNDS
Message: This word is normally spelled as one.
Suggestion: fulltime
...h, they can immediately start working a full time job and making income to support themse...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 418, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[6]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun writing seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'little writing'.
Suggestion: little writing
...not succeed at the higher levels, but a few writing classes may bolster his abilities to co...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, may, similarly, so, still, therefore, well, while, in addition, in fact, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.5258426966 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 23.0 12.4196629213 185% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 11.3162921348 159% => OK
Pronoun: 43.0 33.0505617978 130% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 87.0 58.6224719101 148% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3059.0 2235.4752809 137% => OK
No of words: 581.0 442.535393258 131% => OK
Chars per words: 5.26506024096 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.90957651803 4.55969084622 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.09020027657 2.79657885939 110% => OK
Unique words: 288.0 215.323595506 134% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.49569707401 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 964.8 704.065955056 137% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.740449438202 135% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 3.10617977528 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 7.0 1.77640449438 394% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 29.0 23.0359550562 126% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 55.847918493 60.3974514979 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 152.95 118.986275619 129% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.05 23.4991977007 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.4 5.21951772744 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 10.2758426966 156% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.292849881027 0.243740707755 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0959007068954 0.0831039109588 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.103309353284 0.0758088955206 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.166892399022 0.150359130593 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.090175658545 0.0667264976115 135% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.9 14.1392134831 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.58 48.8420337079 69% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 12.1743820225 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.88 12.1639044944 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.31 8.38706741573 111% => OK
difficult_words: 156.0 100.480337079 155% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.8971910112 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.2143820225 121% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.