Students should only take courses in college that have a direct bearing on their future careers.
Allowing students to only take courses directly related to their majors may seem advantageous at first glance. However, a more careful analysis will reveal that the opposite is true. Too strong a focus on employable skills at the expense of exploring unrelated fields will ultimately stifle creativity and innovation.
The push for a more streamlined college education can be felt throughout the globe. As industries become more specialized, universities which supply the labor market feel the pressure to churn out graduates which can satisfy the niche skills these industries demand. Superficially, this scheme may seem like a win-win situation for both employers and graduates. The former can more easily tap the unique competencies they require, while the latter can spend less time and money for college. However, this line of thinking is pernicious and ultimately harmful to both sides.
College should not just be a factory which churns out employable graduates. To the contrary, it should be an artisan's workshop which molds each student uniquely according to their individual strengths and talents. Because curiosity is an innate human trait, students who explore interests outside of their own fields are likely to have a more fulfilling college life. Furthermore, the additional skills they gain will not be in vain, as we know from history that innovation blossoms at the intersection of seemingly disparate fields. For instance, before the sequencing of the human genome, biology and computer science were initially thought to be immiscible like oil and water. However, the large dataset produced by the Human Genome Project required skills which never existed before - skills which were filled by those who had experience in both biology and computer science. Exploring other fields during college will make us future-ready by giving us a unique skillset which may eventually be required in the next decades. Thus, employing multidisciplinary graduates will also be a boon for businesses and industry.
With our fast-paced society's focus on pragmatism and efficiency, it is indeed tempting to push for a curriculum with a strong focus on students' eventual careers. However, this should not come at the expense of creativity and innovation, which most often blooms at the most unexpected places.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-10-12 | Ibralie | 66 | view |
| 2019-10-13 | Raunaq | 83 | view |
| 2019-09-23 | robrt97 | 73 | view |
| 2019-03-24 | manikantanalla | 50 | view |
| 2019-03-24 | manikantanalla | 53 | view |
- Claim: No act is done purely for the benefit of others.Reason: All actions — even those that seem to be done for other people — are based on self-interest.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim a 50
- Several recent studies have shown a link between health and stair usage. One recently completed study shows that people who live in stairs-only apartment buildings (that is, buildings without elevators) live an average of three years longer than do people 42
- Students should only take courses in college that have a direct bearing on their future careers 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 110, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'artisans'' or 'artisan's'?
Suggestion: artisans'; artisan's
...uates. To the contrary, it should be an artisans workshop which molds each student uniqu...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, however, if, may, so, thus, while, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.4196629213 121% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 33.0505617978 54% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 58.6224719101 72% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1965.0 2235.4752809 88% => OK
No of words: 361.0 442.535393258 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.4432132964 5.05705443957 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.35889894354 4.55969084622 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84905615371 2.79657885939 102% => OK
Unique words: 211.0 215.323595506 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.584487534626 0.4932671777 118% => OK
syllable_count: 611.1 704.065955056 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.1242491714 60.3974514979 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.166666667 118.986275619 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0555555556 23.4991977007 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.05555555556 5.21951772744 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 5.13820224719 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.163346052324 0.243740707755 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0486822319946 0.0831039109588 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0752749047549 0.0758088955206 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0923798318461 0.150359130593 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.054925406545 0.0667264976115 82% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 14.1392134831 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.8420337079 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.27 12.1639044944 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.35 8.38706741573 111% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 100.480337079 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
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.