“Teachers are like candles which are burned to guide us in the darkness.” That is one of the most important sentences in Persian culture which students used it to commemorate their teachers in the past. Although teaching is one of the most respectful careers in every society, its value in some societies nowadays may become more or less than in the past. I strongly believe that teachers were more valued in the past than they are today. In the ensuing lines, I will elaborate on the most outstanding reasons.
First and foremost, teachers were the only source students could refer them to find the answers to their questions in the past in comparison with today. Nowadays, by rising new technologies and online courses and forums, students often refer to the internet and google their questions. The more students rely on online courses, The fewer teachers are valued by students. Thus, students feel no dependency on their teachers anymore. Not only can students update their knowledge daily but also they can access the Internet everywhere and every time. For instance, I am a computer engineering student. In my major, students often search their questions and codes on the internet rather than to asking their teachers. Furthermore, students can find other questions with their answers which other ones have asked before. Therefore, students can be challenged and compete with other engineers in forum environments and make themselves up to date.
Admittedly, there are more valued jobs for people rather than in the past. Until several years ago, every person who had studied had tried to become a teacher. By rising universities and enhancing the number of well-educated persons, people tend to be an engineer or doctor or other academic careers. When the number of universities rises, students tendency for entering to the university and find the best job except teaching enhance, too. For example, in the past, often people followed their ancestor’s careers and a few of them tended to become a teacher. Therefore, the number of teachers was low and consequently their prestige was high. However, today people value people and careers related to the science and technology.
To put it briefly, based on the reasons I mentioned above, teachers were in high prestige in the past because they were one of the limited knowledge resources for students and also it was one of a few appropriate jobs in the past. I believe that people value other careers related to the sciences and technologies rather than teaching.
- Some people prefer to focus on ambitious dreams while others think realistic goals are more important. Which do you prefer and why? 60
- TPO-48 - Integrated Writing Task 78
- TPO 54 Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Governments should spend more money in support of the arts than in support of athletics such as state-sponsored Olympic teams. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 76
- Did bees (a type of insect) exist on Earth as early as 200 million years ago? Such a theory is supported by the discovery of very old fossil structures that resemble bee nests. The structures have been found inside 200- million-year-old fossilized trees i 68
- TPO-41 - Independent Writing Task Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Teachers were more appreciated and valued by society in the past than they are nowadays.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, briefly, but, consequently, first, furthermore, however, may, so, therefore, thus, well, for example, for instance, more or less
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 15.1003584229 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 9.8082437276 71% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 13.8261648746 145% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.0286738351 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 43.0788530466 70% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 52.1666666667 123% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 8.0752688172 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2133.0 1977.66487455 108% => OK
No of words: 416.0 407.700716846 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.12740384615 4.8611393121 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.51620172871 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73848512948 2.67179642975 102% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 212.727598566 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.478365384615 0.524837075471 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 664.2 618.680645161 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 9.59856630824 63% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.2670567584 48.9658058833 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.9545454545 100.406767564 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.9090909091 20.6045352989 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.09090909091 5.45110844103 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 11.8709677419 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.88709677419 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.179967971176 0.236089414692 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0619259000562 0.076458572812 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0647109327727 0.0737576698707 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12613242446 0.150856017488 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0391820687437 0.0645574589148 61% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 11.7677419355 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 58.1214874552 92% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.1575268817 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 10.9000537634 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.4 8.01818996416 105% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 86.8835125448 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 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: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.