Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed.
The thesis mentioned by the author is “Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed”. Educational institutions play a major in student’s life to build up the career for their future growth and development. At the same time they don’t have power to discourage the child, if he don’t excel in that field. I strongly oppose the statement which the author stated. I would like to support my view by providing few examples and append the theory.
In modern era, students spent a lot of time in institutions. These educational firms mold the children and help them to face the harbingers of the future. These institutions expose its students to various fields like arts, science, sports and lot more. A famous institution in Bangalore named “VIT” helps its students to learn the things practically. It won’t conduct any examination or give any assignment. Each teacher takes care of a particular student. Since in today’s world, both husband and wife are busy in earning to provide a better future to their children. In that scenario, home teacher acts as gifted parent to guide his/ her student. They identify the student interests, like and dislikes. According to that teacher nurtures students to focus on the career.
At the same time these schools or colleges don’t have right to criticize the students in the field where they don’t excel. It’s all about the interest when the student gets. I want to state a fiction example to support my statement. A student during his primary school started attending hockey learning classes. Somehow the student is unable to grasp the key tricks in the game even after intense training. After providing lot of training, finally one day the coach said that student is not fit for this game. This doesn’t end the interest of the child in that game. After few years, he was seen in many national and international tournaments. It’s all about the time when the child grasp the things.
If we go back to a decade, we can see there lot many opportunities for the youth in arts. Now this was replaced by science and technology. If educational institutions dissuades its students in pursuing science and tech fields, we cannot see even a single scientist. Later this science will be replaced by some other field. Instead of criticizing the students, educational firms should explain pros and cons of any field and provide broad way to the students.
As I have provided irrefutable evidence in support of stance, I would like to conclude my agreement by reiterating that institutions should not dissuade its students, instead it should expose them to each and every field irrespective of success and failure.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-08-08 | duskcloudxu | 66 | view |
- The real talent of a popular musician cannot accurately be assessed until the musician has been dead for several generations, so that his or her fame does not interfere with honest assessment. 50
- People attend colleges or universities for many different reasons (for example, new experiences, career preparation, increased knowledge etc.). Why do you think people attend colleges or universities? 70
- To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities. 50
- Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed. 50
- Childhood is the happiest times of person's life 83
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, if, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 19.5258426966 41% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 14.8657303371 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 43.0 33.0505617978 130% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 68.0 58.6224719101 116% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2353.0 2235.4752809 105% => OK
No of words: 458.0 442.535393258 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13755458515 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62611441266 4.55969084622 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96065118922 2.79657885939 106% => OK
Unique words: 243.0 215.323595506 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.53056768559 0.4932671777 108% => OK
syllable_count: 722.7 704.065955056 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 6.24550561798 192% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.10617977528 225% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.38483146067 228% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 30.0 20.2370786517 148% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 23.0359550562 65% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 44.1515194152 60.3974514979 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 78.4333333333 118.986275619 66% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.2666666667 23.4991977007 65% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.5 5.21951772744 10% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 17.0 10.2758426966 165% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.83258426966 207% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.335773581562 0.243740707755 138% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0774771289007 0.0831039109588 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.127933531048 0.0758088955206 169% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.185711828969 0.150359130593 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.124376974066 0.0667264976115 186% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.4 14.1392134831 74% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 48.8420337079 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.1743820225 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.94 12.1639044944 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.03 8.38706741573 96% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 100.480337079 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 11.2143820225 71% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.