It is suggested that primary children should learn how to grow vegetables and keep animals. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?
Hands-on experience related to vegetables cultivation and raising animal has been recommended to be integrated into training program of primary schools. While its drawbacks are foreseen, I opine that this proposal offers more benefits.
On the one hand, a number obstacles can be predicted when children have to embark on agriculture work. From medical perspective, it is believed that this activity will contribute to a higher health risk for students. In fact, flora and fauna contains an excessive load of detrimental microorganisms, so if schoolchildren, who have a vulnerable immune system and lack conscience of hygiene, receive a prolonged exposure to them, they may be more prone to dangerous infectious diseases. In addition, from training perspective, there has been a consensus that primary school is the institution responsible for developing children’s the three Rs, namely reading, writing and arithmetic. As a result, educating children about agricultural skills can be seen as a squander of time and resources, for it is not in line with the aforementioned mission.
On the other hand, I argue that horticulture and animal husbandry should be adopted at primary school because of their remarkable advantages. To begin with, these disciplines provide learners with opportunities to know academic subjects inside out. In fact, by discovering how to take care of plants or animals properly, not only do schoolchildren entirely grasp science principles taught in casual classes, but also be able to put knowledge gained into practice. In addition, no sooner do students interact with other species than they get close to nature and develop their interests in ecosystem. Therefore, this activity is of great significance in nurturing youngsters who have a heightened awareness of living in a harmony with flora and fauna, as well as firing passion for prospective biologists.
Briefly, although teaching children about planting trees or keeping animal may be detrimental, I believe that its minuses are still overshadowed by the considerable pluses.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-01-25 | Nina Tsarevich | 56 | view |
| 2023-07-24 | pwlihnkt | 89 | view |
| 2023-07-09 | hieu13092006 | 78 | view |
| 2022-12-07 | yufdtrdfyt | 67 | view |
| 2022-06-08 | quytnee | 78 | view |
- The table below shows the percentage of the population by age groups in one town who rode a bicycle in 2011 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 89
- The information below gives details about the household income and spending on food and clothes by an avarage family in a UK city in 2010 and 2013 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparison where relevant 84
- Scientists predict in the near future cars will be driven by computers not people Why Do you think it is a positive or negative development 89
- the maps below show an art gallery in Australia in 1950 and now 78
- Art is considered an essential part of all cultures throughout the world However these days fewer and fewer people appreciate art and turn their focus to science technology and business Why do you think that is What could be done to encourage more people 89
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 757, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...bout agricultural skills can be seen as a squander of time and resources, for it is not in...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, briefly, but, if, may, so, still, therefore, well, while, in addition, in fact, as a result, as well as, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 41.998997996 114% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1756.0 1615.20841683 109% => OK
No of words: 318.0 315.596192385 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.52201257862 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22286093782 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18375688444 2.80592935109 113% => OK
Unique words: 210.0 176.041082164 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.660377358491 0.561755894193 118% => OK
syllable_count: 554.4 506.74238477 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.76152304609 210% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => 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: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.806746046 49.4020404114 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.076923077 106.682146367 127% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.4615384615 20.7667163134 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.0 7.06120827912 156% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.138751425552 0.244688304435 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0451120349988 0.084324248473 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0439235163174 0.0667982634062 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0850362105304 0.151304729494 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0198954483475 0.056905535591 35% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.8 13.0946893788 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 50.2224549098 77% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.03 12.4159519038 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.39 8.58950901804 121% => OK
difficult_words: 112.0 78.4519038076 143% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.