Giving lectures in auditoriums to large numbers of students in an old way of teaching. With the technology available today, everything should be done online. Do you agree or disagree?
Due to the prevalence of state-of-the-art technology, online sessions have recently become a superior training option among institutes. Heated controversies have risen about whether schools should maintain a traditional teaching method or shift it. It is my strong conviction that the delivery of offline lessons should be kept for its profound benefits.
The foremost reason why my side is favorable for face-to-face lectures is a higher possibility of a teacher-student interaction. In a lecture hall, learners have no obstacles to exchanging information with the instructor. For example, in online lessons, the unstable Internet connection might prevent students from discussing problems with lecturers immediately when they occur. As a result, it seems to be more straightforward for both teachers and students to interaction with each other.
Another reason is that on-site classes can reduce cheating practices. In offline lectures, supervisors can directly observe the process of the students taking the exam. To illustrate, in a real classroom, students cannot use their smart devices such as a cellphone and a laptop to search for the solutions for the questions. Therefore, the test results might show the exact learning abilities of the students.
Some argue that virtual classes can be recorded for students to revise if students find them challenging to comprehend at first. However, schools can produce videos of their lessons to the learners. A number of lesson records from many leading universities such as Harvard and Stanford, have been released on social networking; hence, all people all around the world can watch.
In conclusion, I believe that learning in auditoriums brings overwhelming advantages that online classes cannot alternate. The schools should balance between the online and offline learning to facilitate the students’ learning.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-02-23 | Elly Blink | 78 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 106, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'comprehending'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'challenge' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: comprehending
...evise if students find them challenging to comprehend at first. However, schools can produce ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, hence, however, if, so, therefore, for example, in conclusion, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 41.998997996 88% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1598.0 1615.20841683 99% => OK
No of words: 282.0 315.596192385 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.66666666667 5.12529762239 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09790868904 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.10061318494 2.80592935109 111% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 176.041082164 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.63475177305 0.561755894193 113% => OK
syllable_count: 475.2 506.74238477 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 29.8433409658 49.4020404114 60% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.875 106.682146367 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.625 20.7667163134 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.625 7.06120827912 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.163803371565 0.244688304435 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0512733894036 0.084324248473 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0361112941427 0.0667982634062 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0870873157999 0.151304729494 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0414984696706 0.056905535591 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.0946893788 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 50.2224549098 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.31 12.4159519038 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.36 8.58950901804 121% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 78.4519038076 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.