?
The pedagogic schedules are the minestone of a developed nation. Since the emergence of the human societies, there has been a long hot debate around the quality of education and how the educational materials should expose the students. Some experts believe the best way to educate undergraducate students who do not attend college yet is to be sure of the similarity among the matterials expressed to them. They might conclude this based on a need for a homogenious average knowledge of the students that is not only neccessary for the social need, but also for the upper level educations in college and universities. However, I disagree whith their argument for so many reasons, two of them are elaborated below.
According to the aforementioned belief, the elite group of students who can be so much effective in their future nation success are deprived from the high-quality materials which they need. As a case in point, there is an authorized organization in most of the developed countries which is concerned with exceptional students and arranging the materials they need. Because the same national curriculums are based on the average knowledge of the students, they are limited by a narrow-scope learning material which not only put a force on the elite student progress, but encourage the average students to just be great in these scanty matterials and consequently they won't be willfull to extend their knowledge scope. These outcomes are obviously in contradiction to the goal of promoting the average national knowledge.
Moreover, by doing so, we can not evaluate the validness of the expressed curiculums exposed. We don't know the how much the producers of these schedules are trained. Of course, there could be at least some blunders in these cases which can effect the students beleifs, culture and their future. Although by make similar curriculum for all the national students we can ascertain the homoginity of the average knowledge, but the experienced teacher and schools might want to make some changes relevent to their students who might be in a different level of culture or learning skills.
Overally, I strongly disagree with the idea to make similar national curriculum for the students for a couple of reason the most conspicuous ones are depriving precocious exceptional students from high mastering skills and preculing the local instructures to revise and change the matterials dependent upon their neeed.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-05 | itzavid | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-19 | Ammu helen | 54 | view |
| 2019-11-18 | Patelsmit58 | 33 | view |
| 2019-11-04 | seonjungkim | 50 | view |
| 2019-11-03 | TAMAR | 33 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 98, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...of the expressed curiculums exposed. We dont know the how much the producers of thes...
^^^^
Line 5, column 108, Rule ID: THE_HOW[1]
Message: Did you mean 'how'?
Suggestion: how
...ressed curiculums exposed. We dont know the how much the producers of these schedules a...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, however, if, moreover, so, at least, of course
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.5258426966 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.4196629213 105% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 33.0505617978 73% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 58.6224719101 87% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 12.9106741573 39% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2055.0 2235.4752809 92% => OK
No of words: 394.0 442.535393258 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.21573604061 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45527027702 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8990960517 2.79657885939 104% => OK
Unique words: 205.0 215.323595506 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.520304568528 0.4932671777 105% => OK
syllable_count: 661.5 704.065955056 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.2370786517 69% => 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: 28.0 23.0359550562 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 88.4287156703 60.3974514979 146% => OK
Chars per sentence: 146.785714286 118.986275619 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.1428571429 23.4991977007 120% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.07142857143 5.21951772744 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 10.2758426966 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => 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: 0.0 0.243740707755 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0831039109588 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0758088955206 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.150359130593 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0667264976115 0% => 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: 17.2 14.1392134831 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.6 48.8420337079 71% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 12.1743820225 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.1639044944 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.35 8.38706741573 111% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 100.480337079 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.8971910112 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 11.2143820225 118% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.