What are the different methods students using to achieve information? Online materials, asking teachers or discussing with classmates?
Recently, the phenomenon of achieving information by using different methods and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matters of online materials are highly beneficial, such an issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that asking teachers can be a plus, and I will investigate that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, achieved information by students can provide the society with noticeable effects, which are rooted in the fact that merits, as well as the advantages of discussing with classmates, are crucial. According to my own experience, I performed an academic experiment which discovered the importance of sophisticated means. Thus, beneficial ramifications of useful information are visible.
From a scientific point of view, using different methods by students can provide the community with negative impacts which are associated with the reality that the demerits of irresponsible students are remarkable. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university described inefficient methods. Hence, predicted outcomes of useless information are noticeable.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of achieving information by modern methods far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of hard-working students prove the significance of inexperienced teachers, but also pinpoint possible implications.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, if, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 6.10837438424 65% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 8.36945812808 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 20.9802955665 67% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 31.9359605911 97% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.75862068966 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1355.0 1207.87684729 112% => OK
No of words: 228.0 242.827586207 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.94298245614 5.00649968141 119% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.88582923847 3.92707691288 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.36849814879 2.71678728327 124% => OK
Unique words: 146.0 139.433497537 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.640350877193 0.580463131201 110% => OK
syllable_count: 432.0 379.143842365 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.57093596059 121% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.6157635468 65% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.5024630542 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.7683971371 50.4703680194 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.181818182 104.977214359 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7272727273 20.9669160288 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 7.25397266985 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 6.9802955665 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 2.91625615764 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.360766462048 0.242375264174 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.103076448849 0.0925447433944 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0805623251817 0.071462118173 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.180806952955 0.151781067708 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.045729089685 0.0609392437508 75% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.9 12.6369458128 134% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 25.8 53.1260098522 49% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 10.9458128079 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.17 11.5310837438 149% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.0 8.32886699507 132% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 55.0591133005 167% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.3980295567 96% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.5123152709 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.8888888889 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 80.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.