It is often said that the subjects taught in schools are too academic in orientation and that it would be more useful for children to learn about practical matters such as home management, work and interpersonal skills. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It is often appreciated that academic subjects taught in schools are not necessary for orientation and learning practical matters such as home management, occupation, and interpersonal skills would be more beneficial for children. From my perspective, I completely disagree with this statement.
Practical matters may be too complex for children to be acknowledged, and they might not be helpful without academic knowledge. Initially, practical issues, such as home management, comprises a lot of skills and activities, such as spending control and organising furniture, might be too complicated for children to handle as children would have to deal with a considerable amount of work. Besides, practical skills involve many activities, some of which can only be tackled by utilising academic theories. For example, in order to master communication skills, children need to have an assortment of lexical resources to interact with other people. Therefore, I believe practical matters are out of children’s reach and can only function with the
help of academic subjects.
By contrast, grasping academic knowledge would be advantageous for children’s orientation in being more competitive in the workforce and gaining a deeper understanding of themselves. To begin with, the higher children’s education is, the better qualifications they may get. As a result, they often have more opportunities to be employed than those having fewer qualifications. Additionally, not only would children attain knowledge and skills by channelling effort into the academic curriculum, but they also attain a better understanding of themselves, such as weaknesses and flairs, thus contribute to making the right choices in their lives. For these reasons, I think that academic subjects are in essence of orientation for children.
In conclusion, as for the difficulty of practical matters and that they can only be with academic knowledge, my verdict is that learning academic subjects is of significance in children’s orientation regarding more job prospects and a better understanding of themselves.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-04-07 | Desi Sari Ayuni | 84 | view |
| 2021-10-10 | lennie.butera | 73 | view |
| 2021-07-03 | Lyly241096 | 84 | view |
| 2020-01-09 | Châu Cương Chí | 84 | view |
| 2019-11-07 | Luna Qian | 73 | view |
- Studying with a group of students in a classroom is more beneficial than learning online at home To what extent do you agree or disagree 56
- People in many countries are spending less time with their families What are the reasons and effects of this 78
- It is often said that the subjects taught in schools are too academic in orientation and that it would be more useful for children to learn about practical matters such as home management work and interpersonal skills To what extent do you agree or disagr 73
- Some people think governments should spend money on faster means of public transport However others think money should be spent on other priorities ex cost environment Discuss both views and give opinions 84
- More companies have opened working areas without walls or barriers on their desks Do the disadvantages of open plan offices outweigh the advantages 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 747, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...n’s reach and can only function with the help of academic subjects. By contras...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, if, may, regarding, so, therefore, thus, as for, for example, i think, in conclusion, such as, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 13.1623246493 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 24.0651302605 91% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 41.998997996 100% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.3376753507 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1792.0 1615.20841683 111% => OK
No of words: 313.0 315.596192385 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.72523961661 5.12529762239 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20616286096 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.33221476467 2.80592935109 119% => OK
Unique words: 159.0 176.041082164 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.507987220447 0.561755894193 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 544.5 506.74238477 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
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: 71.2335104972 49.4020404114 144% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.846153846 106.682146367 129% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0769230769 20.7667163134 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.8461538462 7.06120827912 154% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.408148641781 0.244688304435 167% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.160994285098 0.084324248473 191% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.132517052794 0.0667982634062 198% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.245828792868 0.151304729494 162% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.118687542958 0.056905535591 209% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.6 13.0946893788 134% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 50.2224549098 77% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.25 12.4159519038 131% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.06 8.58950901804 105% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 78.4519038076 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 17.0 9.78957915832 174% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.7795591182 158% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.