According to some, educational system should provide a purely informative and instructive function with a focus on a strict curriculum, whilst others are of the belief that incorporating unconventional, holistic methods would serve for a more engaging learning environment. I strongly advocate the latter, as maintaining student engagement is pivotal in increasing academic performance in classes and preparing them for their future.
Firstly, conventional methods of acquiring knowledge are patently obsolete as they’ve served to be a ready-made and easy blueprint for many generations of teachers and their pupils alike. With little to no adjustments in teacher’s expectations, mechanical repetition and regurgitation of absorbed information by students is unlikely to result in lasting knowledge, nor will it result in classes that cater to individual student’s need, hence creating a disparity between traditional high performers and disadvantaged students that may struggle with learning. Take, for example, the recent study conducted by Australian National University in partnership with the Australian Federal Government, which demonstrated that pupils aged 8-16 are more likely to retain information in a long run when a class is delivered through interactive media, such as videos, or practical tasks. Therefore, in order to properly support all students, classes should be delivered incorporating novel approaches to make the study material more interesting and effectively increase engagement.
Secondly, strict adherence to rigid study formats is not conductive to the development of crucial functional skills in the absence of an appropriate education through play. This is largely because traditional education focuses on standardised testing and gives little credence to soft skills, or preparation for real-life situations which cannot be taught with pure reliance on standard techniques. A highly credible example can be found in an inquiry carried out by the UK government that connected lowered student engagement due to the absence of natural, group-based gamification between peers and ability to develop communicative skills connected to academic, as well as work performance later in life. It is, therefore, pivotal for students to engage in educational activities that have a recreational aspect to them.
To conclude, while one can argue that the singular role of educational institutions is to teach conservatively, I firmly believe that failing to incorporate modern practices, such as interactive media and educational games, will not, ultimately, produce well-adjusted individuals.
- Food travels thousands of miles from producers to consumers. Some people think that it would be better for the environment and economy if people only ate the local food produced by farmers.To what extent do you agree or disagree? 89
- Doing an enjoyable activity with a child can develop better skills and more creativity than reading. To what extent do you agree? Use reasons and specific examples to explain your answer. 84
- Some people think that schools have to be more entertaining, while others think that their sole purpose is to educate. Which do you agree with? Use specific reasons and examples to support your opinion. 89
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, hence, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, while, for example, such as, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 41.998997996 131% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 8.3376753507 276% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2258.0 1615.20841683 140% => OK
No of words: 379.0 315.596192385 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.95778364116 5.12529762239 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41224685777 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.37835158701 2.80592935109 120% => OK
Unique words: 238.0 176.041082164 135% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.627968337731 0.561755894193 112% => OK
syllable_count: 723.6 506.74238477 143% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 16.0721442886 68% => 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: 34.0 20.2975951904 168% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 76.295315758 49.4020404114 154% => OK
Chars per sentence: 205.272727273 106.682146367 192% => OK
Words per sentence: 34.4545454545 20.7667163134 166% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.0 7.06120827912 142% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.101845023822 0.244688304435 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0379697735193 0.084324248473 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0214416803787 0.0667982634062 32% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.056540126591 0.151304729494 37% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0244977390803 0.056905535591 43% => 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: 23.9 13.0946893788 183% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 11.59 50.2224549098 23% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 15.9 7.44779559118 213% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 20.1 11.3001002004 178% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.88 12.4159519038 144% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.74 8.58950901804 137% => OK
difficult_words: 154.0 78.4519038076 196% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.5 9.78957915832 169% => OK
gunning_fog: 15.6 10.1190380762 154% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.7795591182 148% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.