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.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
The topic of education has been at the centre of debates ever since the times of Aristotle and Plato. Even more heated has always been the question of what educators should evaluate more in students' learning. There are two apparently colliding approaches: some evaluate students by their knowledge of facts, while others stress the ability to explain ideas and reasons behind those facts.
While recommendation attempts to present two approaches as polar, they, in fact, complete each other: both can be organically present in any learning and assessing process. What is the use of knowing facts without being able to analyse them? - one can argue. But what is the merit of perfectly memorising the fundamentals of logical reasoning without applying them to the real world? The whole idea of the learning process is not only to know certain facts, let it be historical, mathematical or biological facts, but being able to develop analytical skills to enable students to see what stands behind these facts, question them, reveal certain trends, draw parallels with respective concepts based on information or data given. The same applies to the method of evaluation of students' knowledge. In the early '90s, the International Graduate Admission Committee hosted a conference with the ministers of education of participating countries, showing the results of analytical writing on history and historical chronology for the last 5 years. Some of the student's pool represented by certain countries consistently showed high scores for chronology but low scores when it came to analytical essays on a broad range of historical events. During discussions, the recommendation to revisit national curricula and methods of assessment was given. It was not a secret that education systems in those countries were extensively using the "learning by rote" approach, supported by the respective assessment. In this situation, students simply crammed their exams and half-terms or memorised information to get desired grades. As a result, assessment of factual knowledge only firmed certain students' behavior and eventually made them internationally uncompetitive and incapable of getting into top schools overseas. The recommendation was taken on board and the missing piece was introduced both in the education system and method of assessment. Consequently, the students of these countries managed to improve their scores in analytical essays just in 2 years.
The amalgamation of both assessment methods in education will benefit students in their future lives. Moreover, there are always certain areas where one dominates but does not exclude the other. No matter how good the analytical skills of the students of jurisprudence, encouraged and entrenched by educators who put a huge emphasis during the assessment on them, it hardly would help the same student when facing real-world scenarios. Imagine, that student during her PhD defence simulating a solicitor during the trial and defending the case by just showing off her knowledge of abstract concepts without the context applied or vice versa. That would be nonsense. This is what can happen if to distinguish the two approaches in question, preferring one to another in education.
To recap, the recommendation, which makes two methods of assessment sound like irreconcilable matters, is taken to an extreme. In fact, knowledge of facts and the ability to analyse these facts as well as assessing both aspects equally are not mutually exclusive, but rather complete each other. Used by educators in the assessment process, they both can create a synergy in education and make students' knowledge holistic.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-10-18 | raghavchauhan619 | 66 | view |
| 2023-07-25 | Victory | 50 | view |
| 2023-07-25 | Gnyana | 66 | view |
| 2022-07-06 | Soumyadip Kar | 66 | view |
| 2022-07-04 | idris oriyomi | 65 | view |
- Claim In order to help small businesses thrive government should play a minimal role in private business matters Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim In developing and supporting your position be s 66
- Downtown Zurzi is becoming increasingly congested with traffic increasing commuting time for those who work downtown or near downtown The nearby city of Loft was faced with the same problem several years ago and implemented a small weekly tax for driving 77
- Claim In order to help small businesses thrive government should play a minimal role in private business matters Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim In developing and supporting your position be s 66
- 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 Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disag 83
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 277, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...hematical or biological facts, but being able to develop analytical skills to ena...
^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nal peers in analytical essay writing. Another example where the synergy of eva...
^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nking them. That would be a nonsense. To recap, educators should not split two...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, so, while, in fact, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.5258426966 118% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.4196629213 40% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 14.8657303371 121% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 33.0505617978 57% => OK
Preposition: 73.0 58.6224719101 125% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2310.0 2235.4752809 103% => OK
No of words: 429.0 442.535393258 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.38461538462 5.05705443957 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55107846309 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86382206934 2.79657885939 102% => OK
Unique words: 234.0 215.323595506 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.545454545455 0.4932671777 111% => OK
syllable_count: 726.3 704.065955056 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => 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: 17.0 20.2370786517 84% => 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: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 71.7463814599 60.3974514979 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.882352941 118.986275619 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.2352941176 23.4991977007 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.35294117647 5.21951772744 45% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => 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: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.244253238378 0.243740707755 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0804089553689 0.0831039109588 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0663285060536 0.0758088955206 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.174488142354 0.150359130593 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0458306925527 0.0667264976115 69% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 14.1392134831 117% => 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: 14.22 12.1639044944 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.37 8.38706741573 112% => OK
difficult_words: 122.0 100.480337079 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 11.8971910112 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => 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.
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.