Although innovations such as video, computers, and the Internet seem to offer schools improved methods for instructing students, these technologies all too often distract from real learning.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
In every generation, the advent of any new technology gives rise to feverous debates on its usefulness versus its adverse effects. The statement in question considers one such argument - do the 21st century technological innovations like video, computers and the internet overhaul traditional teaching methodologies, or are they just another distraction which impede learning? The author claims that these particular advances have done more harm than good, but I disagree. Any such attempt to disregard these novel innovations undermines the revolution that they have brought in the education world.
Firstly, the use of videos, multimedia images and interactive content has proven to be incredibly effective education tools. Never has it been easier to understand the intricacies of our three dimensional world - complex mathematical objects like the torus or a Klein's bottle which are difficult to realise physically can be created using computer graphics. Instead of spending hours on trying to visualize such tortuous objects in our head based on their textual descriptions, students can now simply play and learn with intutive applications which render them directly on their screens. Multiple independent studies by leading psychological conferences have shown that such use of animated video and graphical interfaces universally increases a student's understanding and retention.
Further, even if we ignore the direct benefits the technological revolution has brought on the world of education as teaching aids, we cannot deny their effects on outreach and inclusion. Internet has brought the world closer, and this is best reflected by the universal availability of educational content. A number of universities and platforms like Khan Academy and Coursera have leveraged the wide reach of the internet and made 'Massively Open Online Courses' (MOOCs) available to everyone with access to a simple smartphone. This has significantly lowered the bar to receive quality education - something which was reserved for the upper class society even in the recent past. Not only does these new methods improve methods of learning, but they allow for a more uniform global access to them.
Nevertheless, notwithstanding the concrete benefits that technology has brought to the table, if left uncontrolled, one cannot ignore the potential it holds to impede learning. Some effects of this can already be seen. A recent study by UNESCO claims that the young generation is found to spend more than 3hrs a day on their smartphone incessantly scrolling their social media profiles and vying for 'likes' in these virtual worlds. But such arguments can be made for any teaching tool - a similar movement revolting against bringing books or any written text into classical schools happened in the late 1500s. Their argument was eerily similar to what the opponents of technology often advocate; they claimed that books can in fact have a corrupting influence on young minds and distract them from true learning.
Clearly, while the issue at hand isn't black and white, the positives of a video driven internet connected world completely outweight the negatives. It may be true that unrestrained use of technology may have some downsides and may distract children, these can be easily controlled as our legislators, teachers and parents mature in identifying such side effects. Regardless of this, their use as effective teaching aids and their unparalleled outreach should not be overshadowed by such concerns.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-07-28 | qsdzlbnwtpzecdeugi | 33 | view |
| 2024-02-19 | Zahid6400 | 75 | view |
| 2024-01-19 | rimpiG | 54 | view |
| 2023-11-09 | Feiyang Wang | 79 | view |
| 2023-08-05 | weonalaz | 58 | view |
- Although innovations such as video computers and the Internet seem to offer schools improved methods for instructing students these technologies all too often distract from real learning Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree 83
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement In my country young people have a better life today than their parents enjoyed when they were young Use reasons and examples to support your answer 76
- As we acquire more knowledge things do not become more comprehensible but more complex and mysterious Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take I 66
- Scholars and researchers should not be concerned with whether their work makes a contribution to the larger society It is more important that they pursue their individual interests however unusual or idiosyncratic those interests may seem 83
- People who are the most deeply committed to an idea or policy are the most critical of it 62
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 211, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tricacies of our three dimensional world - complex mathematical objects like the ...
^^
Line 3, column 749, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'students'' or 'student's'?
Suggestion: students'; student's
...ical interfaces universally increases a students understanding and retention. Further...
^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 34, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...g. Clearly, while the issue at hand isnt black and white, the positives of a vid...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, if, may, nevertheless, so, while, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 14.8657303371 148% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 42.0 33.0505617978 127% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 60.0 58.6224719101 102% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2965.0 2235.4752809 133% => OK
No of words: 540.0 442.535393258 122% => OK
Chars per words: 5.49074074074 5.05705443957 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.82057051367 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94941344291 2.79657885939 105% => OK
Unique words: 309.0 215.323595506 144% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.572222222222 0.4932671777 116% => OK
syllable_count: 919.8 704.065955056 131% => 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: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.758728601 60.3974514979 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 141.19047619 118.986275619 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.7142857143 23.4991977007 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.95238095238 5.21951772744 57% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.181094928057 0.243740707755 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0503026313757 0.0831039109588 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0435687745884 0.0758088955206 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.10185863453 0.150359130593 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0320908160072 0.0667264976115 48% => 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: 17.3 14.1392134831 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.8420337079 77% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.1743820225 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.86 12.1639044944 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.94 8.38706741573 119% => OK
difficult_words: 173.0 100.480337079 172% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 11.8971910112 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 211, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tricacies of our three dimensional world - complex mathematical objects like the ...
^^
Line 3, column 749, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'students'' or 'student's'?
Suggestion: students'; student's
...ical interfaces universally increases a students understanding and retention. Further...
^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 34, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...g. Clearly, while the issue at hand isnt black and white, the positives of a vid...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, if, may, nevertheless, so, while, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 14.8657303371 148% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 42.0 33.0505617978 127% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 60.0 58.6224719101 102% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2965.0 2235.4752809 133% => OK
No of words: 540.0 442.535393258 122% => OK
Chars per words: 5.49074074074 5.05705443957 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.82057051367 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94941344291 2.79657885939 105% => OK
Unique words: 309.0 215.323595506 144% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.572222222222 0.4932671777 116% => OK
syllable_count: 919.8 704.065955056 131% => 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: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.758728601 60.3974514979 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 141.19047619 118.986275619 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.7142857143 23.4991977007 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.95238095238 5.21951772744 57% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.181094928057 0.243740707755 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0503026313757 0.0831039109588 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0435687745884 0.0758088955206 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.10185863453 0.150359130593 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0320908160072 0.0667264976115 48% => 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: 17.3 14.1392134831 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.8420337079 77% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.1743820225 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.86 12.1639044944 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.94 8.38706741573 119% => OK
difficult_words: 173.0 100.480337079 172% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 11.8971910112 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => 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.