To some extent, I agree with the argument that it is vital for students to gain experience collaborating with peers to study a topic and to achieve a common goal. However, the arguer extends the opinion to an extreme that the traditional lecture-based instruction in college and university courses should be eliminated which leaves no room for alternative learning method except for group assignments. On balance, my points of view and deep analysis are as follows.
Indeed, it is a good way for students to learn from each other and concentrate on the same topic within a limited period to complete the group assignment on time, in which the strength of group members will be consolidated and enhanced, and the weakness will be circumvent otherwise. We can expect a better-quality works through this process if it can be implemented repeatedly.
However, the improvement of the team will be constrained to a celling level without the instruction of traditional lecture given that the knowledge of group members are homogenous and limited to a relatively low level. With the intervene of traditional lecture-based instruction, the group members can break their bottlenecks and obtain new development. For example, in the case that a group lack an adequate and suitable technology to assess extent of the impact of global warming on the development of the industry, teachers can teach the latest and advanced knowledge on time, thus empowering the group the corresponding abilities to continue to do their jobs.
The combination of group assignments and traditional lecture-based instruction would be the best way to cultivate students, for whom the collaboration and the reverence of knowledge is equally important. Students would become too complacent and conceited to have the motivation to learn more and better if they cannot recognize their inherent limitations, which the lecture-based instruction can give and compensate. We can imagine an individual with a certain level of knowledge but lose the curiosity of the world, and then how could the person have further capacity for improvement?
In conclusion, traditional lecture-based instruction cannot be replaced though it is universally acknowledged that it is significant to collaborate with peers through group assignments. The two ways are equally vital and can supplement the weakness resulted if only one learning method is maintained.
- Some people want government to spend money on searching for life on other planets However others think it is a waste of public money when the earth has so many problems Discuss these two views and give your own opinion 78
- The following memorandum is from the business manager of Happy Pancake House restaurants Butter has now been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the southwestern United States Only about 2 percent of customers have complain 38
- The following was written as a part of an application for a small business loan by a group of developersin the city of Monroe A jazz music club in Monroe would be a tremendously profitable enterprise Currently the nearest jazzclub is 65 miles away thu 78
- Some people want government to spend money on searching for life on other planets However others think it is a waste of public money when the earth has so many problems Discuss these two views and give your own opinion 73
- Claim Group assignments that students must work together to complete should replace a substantial amount of traditional lecture based instruction in college and university courses Reason It is vital for students to gain experience collaborating with peers 83
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 225, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...limited to a relatively low level. With the intervene of traditional lecture-based instructio...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, so, then, thus, except for, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 14.8657303371 121% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 33.0505617978 57% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 58.6224719101 84% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 12.9106741573 147% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2037.0 2235.4752809 91% => OK
No of words: 377.0 442.535393258 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.40318302387 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4064143971 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.22965837875 2.79657885939 115% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 215.323595506 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.51724137931 0.4932671777 105% => OK
syllable_count: 633.6 704.065955056 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 20.2370786517 64% => 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: 29.0 23.0359550562 126% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 68.7910823999 60.3974514979 114% => OK
Chars per sentence: 156.692307692 118.986275619 132% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.0 23.4991977007 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.53846153846 5.21951772744 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.343911601831 0.243740707755 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.120071728466 0.0831039109588 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0921491636803 0.0758088955206 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.199225275717 0.150359130593 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0829154681241 0.0667264976115 124% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.5 14.1392134831 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.58 48.8420337079 69% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 7.92365168539 164% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 12.1743820225 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.63 12.1639044944 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.47 8.38706741573 113% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 100.480337079 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.8971910112 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.2143820225 121% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => 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.