The speaker makes a threshold claim that students who learn only facts learn very little, then condudes that students should always learn about concepts, ideas, and trends before they memorize facts. While I wholeheartedly agree with the threshold claim, the condusion unfairly generalizes about the learning process. In fact, following the speaker's advice would actually impede the learning of concepts and ideas, as well as impeding the development of insightful
and useful new ones.
Turning first to the speaker's threshold daim, I strongly agree that ifwe learn only facts we
learn very little. Consider the task of memorizing the periodic table of dements, which any student can memorize without any knowledge of chemistry, or that the table relates to chemistry. Rote memorization of the table amounts to a bit of mental exercise-an opportunity to practice memorization techniques and perhaps learn some new ones. Otherwise, the student
has learned very little about chemical dements, or about anything for that matter.
As for the speaker's ultimate claim, I concede that postponing the memorization of facts until
after one leams ideas and concepts holds certain advantages. With a conceptual framework already in place a student is better able to understand the meaning of a fact, and to appreciate
its significance. As a result, the student is more likely to memorize the fact to begin with, and
less likely to forget it as time passes. Moreover, in my observation students whose first goal is
to memorize facts tend to stop there--for whatever reason. It seems that by focusing on facts 17 first students risk equating the learning process with the assimilation of trivia; in turn, students risk learning nothing of much use in solving real world problems.
Conceding that students must learn ideas and concepts, as well as facts relating to them, in order to learning anything meaningful, I nevertheless disagree that the former should always precede the latter--for three reasons. In the first place, I see know reason why memorizing a
fact cannot precede learning about its meaning and significance--as long as the student does
not stop at rote memorization. Consider once again our hypothetical chemistry student. The speaker might advise this student to first learn about the historical trends leading to the
discovery of the elements, or to learn about the concepts of altering chemical compounds to achieve certain reactions--before studying the periodic table. Having no familiarity with the basic vocabulary of chemistry, which includes the informarion in the periodic table, this student would come away from the first two lessons bewildered and confused in other words, having learned little.
In the second place, the speaker misunderstands the process by which we learn ideas and concepts, and by which we develop new ones. Consider, for example, how economics
students learn about the relationship between supply and demand, and the resulting concept
of market equilibrium, and of surplus and shortage. Learning about the dynamics of supply and demand involves (1) entertaining a theory, and perhaps even formulating a new one, (2)
testing hypothetical scenarios against the theory, and (3) examining real-world facts for the purpose of confirming, refuting, modifying, or qualifying the theory. But which step should come first? The speaker would have us follow steps 1 through 3 in that order. Yet, theories, concepts, and ideas rarely materialize out of thin air; they generally emerge from empirical observations--i.e., facts. Thus the speaker's notion about how we should learn concepts and ideas gets the learning process backwards.
In the third place, strict adherence to the speaker's advice would surely lead to ill-conceived ideas, concepts, and theories. Why? An idea or concept conjured up without the benefit of data amounts to little more than the conjurer's hopes and desires. Accordingly, conjurers will tend to seek out facts that support their prejudices and opinions, and overlook or avoid facts that
refute them. One telling example involves theories about the center of the universe. Understandably, we ego-driven humans would prefer that the universe revolve around us.
Early theories presumed so for this reason, and facts that ran contrary to this ego-driven
theory were ignored, while observers of these facts were scorned and even vilified. In short, students who strictly follow the speaker's prescription are unlikely to contribute significantly to the advancement of knowledge.
To sum up, in a vacuum facts are meaningless, and only by filling that vacuum with ideas and concepts can students learn, by gaining useful perspectives and insights about facts. Yet, since facts are the very stuff from which ideas, concepts, and trends spring, without some facts students cannot learn much of anything. In the final analysis, then, students should learn facts right along with concepts, ideas, and trends.
- Students should memorize facts only after they have studied the ideas trends and concepts that help explain those facts Students who have learned only facts have learned very little GRE Issue 14 40
- 49. Claim: We can usually learn much more from people whose views we share than from those whose views contradict our own.Reason: Disagreement can cause stress and inhibit learning.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or dis 58
- 49. Claim: We can usually learn much more from people whose views we share than from those whose views contradict our own.Reason: Disagreement can cause stress and inhibit learning.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or dis 58
- Students should memorize facts only after they have studied the ideas, trends, and concepts that help explain those facts. Students who have learned only facts have learned very little. - GRE Issue 14 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 342, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'speakers'' or 'speaker's'?
Suggestion: speakers'; speaker's
...earning process. In fact, following the speakers advice would actually impede the learni...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 22, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'speakers'' or 'speaker's'?
Suggestion: speakers'; speaker's
... useful new ones. Turning first to the speakers threshold daim, I strongly agree that i...
^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 29, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'times'?
Suggestion: times
... with, and less likely to forget it as time passes. Moreover, in my observation stu...
^^^^
Line 18, column 398, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...om empirical observations--i.e., facts. Thus the speakers notion about how we should...
^^^^
Line 18, column 407, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'speakers'' or 'speaker's'?
Suggestion: speakers'; speaker's
...cal observations--i.e., facts. Thus the speakers notion about how we should learn concep...
^^^^^^^^
Line 19, column 45, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'speakers'' or 'speaker's'?
Suggestion: speakers'; speaker's
...he third place, strict adherence to the speakers advice would surely lead to ill-conceiv...
^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['accordingly', 'actually', 'but', 'first', 'if', 'look', 'moreover', 'nevertheless', 'second', 'so', 'then', 'third', 'thus', 'well', 'while', 'as for', 'for example', 'in fact', 'in short', 'as a result', 'as well as', 'in other words', 'to begin with', 'to sum up', 'in the first place', 'in the second place', 'in the third place']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.248306997743 0.240241500013 103% => OK
Verbs: 0.141083521445 0.157235817809 90% => OK
Adjectives: 0.068848758465 0.0880659088768 78% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0575620767494 0.0497285424764 116% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0259593679458 0.0444667217837 58% => OK
Prepositions: 0.121896162528 0.12292977631 99% => OK
Participles: 0.0440180586907 0.0406280797675 108% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.83941528036 2.79330140395 102% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0282167042889 0.030933414821 91% => OK
Particles: 0.00338600451467 0.0016655270985 203% => OK
Determiners: 0.0914221218962 0.0997080785238 92% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0191873589165 0.0249443105267 77% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0180586907449 0.0148568991511 122% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 4962.0 2732.02544248 182% => OK
No of words: 776.0 452.878318584 171% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.39432989691 6.0361032391 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.27795192801 4.58838876751 115% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.417525773196 0.366273622748 114% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.327319587629 0.280924506359 117% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.237113402062 0.200843997647 118% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.134020618557 0.132149295362 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83941528036 2.79330140395 102% => OK
Unique words: 368.0 219.290929204 168% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.474226804124 0.48968727796 97% => OK
Word variations: 62.6161708868 55.4138127331 113% => OK
How many sentences: 35.0 20.6194690265 170% => OK
Sentence length: 22.1714285714 23.380412469 95% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.1758638056 59.4972553346 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 141.771428571 141.124799967 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.1714285714 23.380412469 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.771428571429 0.674092028746 114% => OK
Paragraphs: 22.0 4.94800884956 445% => There are something wrong with the essay format.
Language errors: 6.0 5.21349557522 115% => OK
Readability: 54.9033873343 51.4728631049 107% => OK
Elegance: 1.84422110553 1.64882698954 112% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.302049962269 0.391690518653 77% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.1004547943 0.123202303941 82% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0758608266222 0.077325440228 98% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.612675796267 0.547984918172 112% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.250067591148 0.149214159877 168% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.108207818697 0.161403998019 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0790595832707 0.0892212321368 89% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.202405640057 0.385218514788 53% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0934347847569 0.0692045440612 135% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.121676691958 0.275328986314 44% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0758332242524 0.0653680567796 116% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 10.4325221239 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.30420353982 151% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 13.0 4.88274336283 266% => Less neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 14.0 7.22455752212 194% => OK
Negative topic words: 7.0 3.66592920354 191% => OK
Neutral topic words: 9.0 2.70907079646 332% => OK
Total topic words: 30.0 13.5995575221 221% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Less content wanted. Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.