Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
Educational institutes have the responsibility of grooming their students and making sure that students are ready to face problems encountered in the real world on a daily basis. Schools and Colleges measure the abilities of their students through a host of different criterion which can vary from institute to institute and predict the likelihood of their students succeeding in their fields. That being said, educational institutions should steer clear of trying to dissuade students, who from the institution's perspective, are likely to fail in their respective fields.
Educational institutes around the globe have adopted a standard way of judging students in different fields. While marking criterion differ from institute to institute, almost every institute differentiates it's students through a rigorous grading criteria. Through this grading system, different institutes measure a student's ability in their respective field. But there are a host of other factors that vary from institute to institute. For example since teaching quality can vary across different institutes, students on the receiving end of poor teaching methods may become disillusioned with their fields and completely loose interest in their subjects leading to poor grades. So it would be an inaccurate assessment on the part of the institute if they were to judge that the student is less likely to succeed in his or her field. Another important factor is that many students respond well to a more pragmatic approach towards their fields rather than a theoretical one. Students may show a lack of interest in classes but may become more involved in the field when they encounter real life problems thus increasing their chances of success.
On the other hand, one can argue that even if students are passionate about their fields, it doesn't mean that the student is more likely to succeed in the field of study. Yes the student may ultimately benefit if the institution decided to dissuade the student from carrying on in a field in which he or she is less likely to succeed, but if students are passionate about their respective fields of study then it would not be fruitful for them to pursue an alternative field based on the judgment of the institute whose sole criterion maybe relative grading.
Ultimately it must be the student who decides whether he or she is fit for a certain field of study and there should be minimal interference from the educational institute regarding the future of the student.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-29 | jenniferjack07 | 66 | view |
| 2020-01-27 | lanhhoang | 83 | view |
| 2020-01-23 | lanhhoang | 16 | view |
| 2020-01-22 | AkkineniAnuhya4 | 50 | view |
| 2020-01-20 | maneesha ch | 50 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 390, Rule ID: THERE_RE_MANY[3]
Message: Possible agreement error. Did you mean 'hosts'?
Suggestion: hosts
...their respective field. But there are a host of other factors that vary from institu...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, may, regarding, so, then, thus, well, while, for example, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 33.0505617978 103% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 58.6224719101 109% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 12.9106741573 39% => More nominalization wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2122.0 2235.4752809 95% => OK
No of words: 407.0 442.535393258 92% => OK
Chars per words: 5.21375921376 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49157444576 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79197439259 2.79657885939 100% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 215.323595506 90% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.476658476658 0.4932671777 97% => OK
syllable_count: 660.6 704.065955056 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 6.24550561798 32% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.740449438202 135% => OK
Article: 0.0 4.99550561798 0% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.2370786517 69% => OK
Sentence length: 29.0 23.0359550562 126% => OK
Sentence length SD: 72.1028531237 60.3974514979 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 151.571428571 118.986275619 127% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.0714285714 23.4991977007 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 5.21951772744 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.24764443893 0.243740707755 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.100377544819 0.0831039109588 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0485886890036 0.0758088955206 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.171726320993 0.150359130593 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0368523132654 0.0667264976115 55% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.6 14.1392134831 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.04 48.8420337079 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.1743820225 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.53 12.1639044944 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.57 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 100.480337079 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 11.8971910112 130% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.2143820225 121% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.