Educators should base their assessment of students' learning not on students' grasp of facts but on the ability to explain the ideas, trends, and concepts that those facts illustrate.
Learning assessments are the best ways to judge whether the knowledge imparted is imbibed and assimilated by the student correctly. Without such a mechanism, it will be impossible to conclude where the student stand with respect to their understanding of the subject. According to the author these assessments should be based not on students' grasp of facts but on the ability to interpret and analyze the ideas those facts illustrate. I am not in complete agreement with this statement.
Although the author is correct in taking into account the analysis of the facts, as part of the assessment, the author undermines the role of grasping the facts. This argument is flawed since the analysis can only be built upon the grasping of the facts. Without a clear understanding of the facts, it will be impossible for the student to derive an analysis and interpret ideas based on those facts. The relationship here is a hierarchical one. Without a lucid grasp on the facts, sound ideas cannot be developed.
A feasible way to make a healthy assessment would be to test whether the student has a clear grasp of the concepts being taught, and only when satisfactory results are obtained here, should the educator move on to test the understanding of ideas and concepts based on the facts.
For instance, while assessing a student on his understanding of Newton's laws of motion, it is pertinent that the student be assessed first whether he remembers the laws and related equations correctly, and only then assessed to solve practical problems based on those laws or their derivatives. If he fails in the first test, he is doomed to fail in the second one as well. The prudent technique here would be to educate the student until he has a clear grasp on the facts and then assess the analysis.
The ability to express ideas and concepts based on facts is a superior skill. It involves building logical skills and reading between the lines in some cases. These analytical skills depend upon the cognitive abilities of the students, which vary from student to student. Hence some students are bound to fair low on these skills. Basing assessments solely on the analytical skills might turn out to be unfair to the students unless analytical skill development was the course they enrolled for.
In summation, although understanding of the ideas and interpretations of the facts taught in a class are important factors to consider during an assessment, the basic understanding of facts should not be undermined, since the former is built on latter.
- Educators should base their assessment of students' learning not on students' grasp of facts but on the ability to explain the ideas, trends, and concepts that those facts illustrate. 66
- Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the Palean people. Recently, however, archa 59
- The desire of corporations to maximize profits contends with general welfare of the nation. 66
- Must art be widely understood to have merit? 58
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 273, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...ts, which vary from student to student. Hence some students are bound to fair low on ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, if, second, so, then, well, while, for instance, in some cases, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.5258426966 123% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 11.3162921348 35% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 33.0505617978 67% => OK
Preposition: 69.0 58.6224719101 118% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 12.9106741573 70% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2124.0 2235.4752809 95% => OK
No of words: 427.0 442.535393258 96% => OK
Chars per words: 4.97423887588 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54576487731 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81141469092 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 198.0 215.323595506 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.463700234192 0.4932671777 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 651.6 704.065955056 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 72.4373069275 60.3974514979 120% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.789473684 118.986275619 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4736842105 23.4991977007 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.15789473684 5.21951772744 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
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: 0.332409362634 0.243740707755 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.10669784333 0.0831039109588 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.103072848433 0.0758088955206 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.181893783058 0.150359130593 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0843662438224 0.0667264976115 126% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.1392134831 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.8420337079 118% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 12.1639044944 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.02 8.38706741573 96% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 100.480337079 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.