School administrators at an elementary school have recently decided to increase the amount of hours spent teaching kids about robotics, computer programming, and other elements of science and technology. However, they were forced to reduce the amount of hours spent on teaching art and music. Do you agree or disagree with this new policy?
Opinions vary with the regard to the question of whether the amount of hours spent on teaching art and music should be redistributed to teaching high-tech trends. Although teaching art and music is a highly valuable for children development, I dare say that spending more time obtaining knowledge about current trends in science and technology may boost children development as early as in elementary schools; in addition it fosters their abilities to catch the trends in science in later stages of their lives.
To begin with, the study of art and music helps to develop an important feeling such as empathy in children. To be specific, young are most vulnerable to changes in characters in early years, hence, by studying them such emotional subjects as art or music, school administrators are able to lay the fundament of humanity in them. Moreover, this practice could lead children on stage through discovery of hidden musical talents.
Nonetheless, current trends in technological development and computerisation of nations are conjugated with the need to develop knowledge in these spheres. For example, the Internet fosters the ability to communicate faster and cheaper, creates opportunities to use more safe electronic financial transactions e.t.c. In order to cover those trends the redistribution of hours spent on special subjects looks logical, especially in terms of shortage of time. By providing children with greater amount of data and knowledge in science in their young age, school teachers may induce the creativity of children to work, who, in turn, may provide further discoveries in programming methods or technology or science.
By the same token, the art and music are fundamental subjects, to which humanity has already got used to. The human nature works in the such a way as to when it feels more comfortable by repeating already known patterns for centuries. Insofar as creativity and science has led mankind in the era of technological boom, extra efforts are needed to cover those trends and provide them with extra resources for further development. This evolution is positively correlated with the development of the mankind itself, like a roundabout effect. To be specific, by leaving the comfort zone created by repetition of the same patterns, children are able to create wonderful things.
All in all, spending more hours on covering current trends inculcates in children the responsibility for future of mankind. I firmly believe, that the life is on the other side of comfort zone, and further steps in development of current trends could “lead humanity into space”.
- People learn things better from those at their own level such as fellows or co workers than from those at higher level such as teachers or supervisors 73
- People learn things better from those at their own level such as fellows or co workers than from those at higher level such as teachers or supervisors 76
- It is better to have broad knowledge of many academic subjects than to specialize in one specific subject 90
- Archaeologists have recently found a fossil of a 150 million year old mammal known as Repenornamus robustus R robustus Interestingly the mammal s stomach contained the remains of a psittacosaur dinosaur Some researchers have therefore suggested that R rob 3
- As early as the twelfth century A D the settlements of Chaco Canyon in New Mexico in the American Southwest were notable for their great houses massive stone buildings that contain hundreds of rooms and often stand three or four stories high Archaeologist 3
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 34, Rule ID: WHETHER[3]
Message: Wordiness: Shorten this phrase to the shortest possible suggestion.
Suggestion: whether; the question whether
Opinions vary with the regard to the question of whether the amount of hours spent on teaching a...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, if, look, may, moreover, nonetheless, so, as to, for example, in addition, such as, to begin with, by the same token
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 15.1003584229 79% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 9.8082437276 71% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 13.8261648746 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 11.0286738351 36% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 43.0788530466 42% => OK
Preposition: 80.0 52.1666666667 153% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 8.0752688172 223% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2198.0 1977.66487455 111% => OK
No of words: 417.0 407.700716846 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.27098321343 4.8611393121 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.5189133491 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92453490987 2.67179642975 109% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 212.727598566 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.525179856115 0.524837075471 100% => OK
syllable_count: 680.4 618.680645161 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 9.59856630824 52% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 12.0 4.94265232975 243% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.6003584229 73% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 27.0 20.1344086022 134% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 73.6543277751 48.9658058833 150% => OK
Chars per sentence: 146.533333333 100.406767564 146% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.8 20.6045352989 135% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.53333333333 5.45110844103 157% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 11.8709677419 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.85842293907 26% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.126902600739 0.236089414692 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0394978876413 0.076458572812 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0438180007537 0.0737576698707 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.073546387235 0.150856017488 49% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.048925370639 0.0645574589148 76% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.3 11.7677419355 147% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 58.1214874552 76% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 10.1575268817 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 10.9000537634 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.07 8.01818996416 113% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 86.8835125448 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 10.002688172 190% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.0537634409 127% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.247311828 137% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 Out of 30
---------------------
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.