Students should always question what they are taught instead of accepting it passively.
Education is not about learning existing knowledge but is also bout questioning that knowledge when it fails to cogently explain the given observation. Therefore, the speaker’s proposition that students should question, rather than passively accept, what they are taught is agreeable. Yet, undue questioning by students, especially when based on habits rather than substance, could be counterproductive for students, and impede the learning process.
The first reason to support the argument stems from the fact that ‘questioning’ is the best way of learning. This penchant of critical thinking has to be imbibed among the children from the early days of their education. The culture of questioning the explanations and information will prompt students to approach their subject critically and gain deeper understanding. It is this very habit of questioning existing knowledge that forms the basis of scientific discoveries. For example, had Copernicus not questioned Ptolemy’s geo-centric model of the universe, he would have never been able to revolutionize human understanding of the Universe. Additionally, this trend would also force teachers to come better prepared to the classroom, thereby, enhancing the knowledge transfer. Conversely, when students passively accept the classroom material they are unlikely to learn beyond the boundaries of the syllabus or ‘the lecture’. They will superficially absorb the classroom teaching; and would never develop the ability to apply that surface knowledge to practical problems that they may encounter in their profession or life.
Moreover, when students question what they are being taught, learning process becomes more interactive. Each individual has his own way of understanding a topic, explanation or a problem. When students are prompted to put forth their questions, instead of becoming mute spectators, they are likely to engage in discussions and debates, therefore, bringing in new ideas and perspectives to the given topic. This would not only help students to develop their own interpretation skills but would also enlighten them with broader and holistic understanding of the given topic. Consequently, the more the time is spent on discussing and debating a given topic, the greater would be the retention and transfer of knowledge.
Finally, the classroom inculcated habit of questioning the given information would also help students to protect themselves from trickery, and fulfil their role as responsible citizens. Many autocratic governments in the past have used education to disseminate particular ideologies. For instance, Hitler used school education as an avenue to propagate his idea of ‘Aryan Supremacy’ and ‘Jewish infidelity’. Similarly, History textbooks in North Korea, till date, are being used to glorify its present and past regimes. A sense of objectivity on part of students while studying would help them avoid becoming gullible propaganda tools. This would also foster self-confidence among students to question government policies, prevalent social norms, etc.
However, questioning founded on undue mistrust would be counterproductive for students’ education. Mistrusting basic laws of science, due to habitual suspicion, will create illusions about human existence and future. Therefore, students must first gain a threshold experiential knowledge before they start questioning the proven laws and timeless doctrines of science, law, arts, etc. Furthermore, a student who asks too many questions would find little time to absorb knowledge, even when that piece of information might be crucial for his education. Yet, they must never be discouraged from asking “Why?” for everything they are taught.
In conclusion, when students question what they are taught, instead of passively accepting it, they benefit by gaining deeper understanding of the subject; better participation in the learning process; and developing self-confidence and objectivity in their function as responsible citizens. However, that questioning must be based on experiential knowledge; otherwise, undue mistrust would always serve to impede learning.
- Some people believe that government funding of the arts is necessary to ensure that the arts can flourish and be available to all people Others believe that government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of the arts 66
- Educational institutions should actively encourage their students to choose fields of study that will prepare them for lucrative careers 100
- If a goal is worthy, then any means taken to attain it are justifiable. 83
- Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state even if these areas could be developed for economic gain 83
- It is more harmful to compromise one s own beliefs than to adhere to them 83
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 33, Rule ID: AFFORD_VBG[1]
Message: This verb is used with infinitive: 'to exist'.
Suggestion: to exist
Education is not about learning existing knowledge but is also bout questioning ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 752, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t policies, prevalent social norms, etc. However, questioning founded on undue mi...
^^^^^
Line 10, column 385, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ss doctrines of science, law, arts, etc. Furthermore, a student who asks too many...
^^
Line 12, column 425, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... would always serve to impede learning.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, similarly, so, therefore, while, as to, for example, for instance, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.5258426966 123% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.4196629213 177% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 14.8657303371 141% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.3162921348 141% => OK
Pronoun: 42.0 33.0505617978 127% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 73.0 58.6224719101 125% => OK
Nominalization: 29.0 12.9106741573 225% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3553.0 2235.4752809 159% => OK
No of words: 607.0 442.535393258 137% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.85337726524 5.05705443957 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.96360453597 4.55969084622 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18374729015 2.79657885939 114% => OK
Unique words: 313.0 215.323595506 145% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.515650741351 0.4932671777 105% => OK
syllable_count: 1052.1 704.065955056 149% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 6.24550561798 176% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 29.0 20.2370786517 143% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.317674539 60.3974514979 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.517241379 118.986275619 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9310344828 23.4991977007 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 5.21951772744 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 10.2758426966 136% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 5.13820224719 195% => OK
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: 0.340225321368 0.243740707755 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0911457334897 0.0831039109588 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.117148257148 0.0758088955206 155% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.200657237904 0.150359130593 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0940731981702 0.0667264976115 141% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 14.1392134831 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.8420337079 87% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.65 12.1639044944 137% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.26 8.38706741573 110% => OK
difficult_words: 178.0 100.480337079 177% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 11.7820224719 144% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.