Students in schools and universities learn more from their teacher than other means such as the internet, libraries or TV. To what extents do you agree or disagree?
It is believed that undergraduates in institutes and academe accumulate more knowledge from their instructors’ education than the study by themselves relying on measures including cyberspace, libraries, and television in the booming era of technology. From my perspective, I completely agree with this statement.
On the one hand, there is a large variety of reasons why an abundance of people argue against this opinion. Specifically, grounds in terms of certain benefits from studying based on technology platforms consisting of internet and TV or through libraries, which learners in education establishments mentioned above would reap. For the best, self-study helps youngsters to form essentially practical skills such as self-improvement, proactive, and independent-thinking, which means the proficiency in these abilities may pave the way for their future. Not to mention that well-known channels, YouTube, for example, is a virtual encyclopedia that provides undergraduates with a huge amount of information that they might not deliver by their teachers.
On the other hand, despite the obvious perks of self-study by means of online media platforms, libraries, and TV, it has also a wide number of limitations. Firstly, the learning method of students relying upon these manners may be inferior to teachers when it comes to the problem-solving ability because tutors can deliver lessons and knowledge throughout face-to-face studying in the type of classical education, therefore, they know vividly their student’s capability. Secondly, there are some compulsory subjects such as mental and physical majors that is impossible to educate via computer, libraries or audio-vision devices and this also demonstrated that the role of teachers is pivotal and irreplaceable
In conclusion, regardless of the undeniable merits of the self-study of youngsters, I support those who believe that students learn through the internet, libraries, and TV maybe not effective and as good as the study from their teacher.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-30 | Harrynguyen1980 | 72 | view |
- Nowadays, the way many people interact with each other has changed because of technology. In what ways has technology affected the types of relationships people make? Has this become a positive or negative development? 89
- Men do most of the high-level jobs. Should governments encourage a certain rate of these jobs to be for women? 84
- Space travel has been possible for some time and some people believe that space tourism should be developed in the future. What could be the reasons for this? Do you think it is a positive or o negative development? 89
- Women are better at childcare than men therefore they should focus more on raising children and lesson their working life To what extents do you agree or disagree with this statement 72
- As a result of tourism development, English has become the most popular language. Some people think that it will be the only language to be spoken one day. Do the advantages of having one language outweigh its disadvantages? 61
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 750, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ey might not deliver by their teachers. On the other hand, despite the obvious p...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, for example, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 13.1623246493 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 24.0651302605 112% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 41.998997996 112% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1729.0 1615.20841683 107% => OK
No of words: 301.0 315.596192385 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.74418604651 5.12529762239 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16525528304 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.43976577828 2.80592935109 123% => OK
Unique words: 188.0 176.041082164 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.624584717608 0.561755894193 111% => OK
syllable_count: 528.3 506.74238477 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 0.809619238477 494% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 16.0721442886 56% => 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: 33.0 20.2975951904 163% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 115.867527593 49.4020404114 235% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 192.111111111 106.682146367 180% => OK
Words per sentence: 33.4444444444 20.7667163134 161% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.7777777778 7.06120827912 195% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.223799194161 0.244688304435 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0792368946524 0.084324248473 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0487781776008 0.0667982634062 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.136290851419 0.151304729494 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0339947147519 0.056905535591 60% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 22.3 13.0946893788 170% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 21.06 50.2224549098 42% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 18.5 11.3001002004 164% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.6 12.4159519038 134% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.89 8.58950901804 127% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 78.4519038076 136% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 15.2 10.1190380762 150% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.