In most of the education systems, students are assessed by written examinations. Do you think it is a good idea or not? Give your reasons.
Recently, assessing student by written examination has sparked an ongoing controversy, which inevitably leads to a moot question, “is it advantageous or not?” Whereas it is a widely held view that evaluation student by written exam is highly beneficial, I will discuss controversial aspects of that throughout this essay.
From the psychological standpoint, students’ knowledge is bound up inextricably with assessment system, which indicates they lead to both written exam and oral exam. As a well-known example, a longitudinal study conducted by eminent scientists in 2014 demonstrates the relationship between educational level and student’s actual ability as well as an exponential increase in academic achievements. Their academic criticism was impressive. Consequently, my empirical evidence presented thus far support the contention that the likelihood of occurring practical exam is correlated positively with not only irreversible changes but also adverse outcomes.
Within the realm of educational science, without the slightest doubt, efficient training systems attribute to alternative hypotheses, in that it would come down to tutors’ interventions, textbook implications, and specialist institutions. A salient example of such attribution is non-governmental organizations, which is a cause for concern since it was mistaken to take formal examination improvements for granted. Had there been a paradigm shift earlier, scholars might have had the opportunity to pinpoint assessment method problems. Likewise, hardly had they confine their attention to computer-based examination, theoretical assessment, and even traditional teaching methods. Hence, it is reasonable to infer the pivotal rule of systematic changes.
To conclude, as for myself, as the saying goes “all’s well that ends well,” after analyzing what elaborated above, I highly agree that written examinations are of high importance. However, we perceive that with the benefit of hindsight, the more we research, the further we discover.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 84, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , &apos
...oes 'all's well that ends well,' after analyzing what elaborated above,...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, hence, however, if, likewise, so, thus, well, whereas, as for, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.5418719212 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 6.10837438424 49% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 20.9802955665 114% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 31.9359605911 110% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 5.75862068966 243% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1771.0 1207.87684729 147% => OK
No of words: 289.0 242.827586207 119% => OK
Chars per words: 6.12802768166 5.00649968141 122% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12310562562 3.92707691288 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.54900929955 2.71678728327 131% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 139.433497537 146% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.705882352941 0.580463131201 122% => OK
syllable_count: 551.7 379.143842365 146% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.57093596059 121% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.6157635468 130% => OK
Article: 4.0 1.56157635468 256% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.65517241379 164% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.5024630542 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 77.5693238336 50.4703680194 154% => OK
Chars per sentence: 147.583333333 104.977214359 141% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0833333333 20.9669160288 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.16666666667 7.25397266985 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 6.9802955665 129% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 2.75862068966 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 2.91625615764 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0949577674787 0.242375264174 39% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0286386529882 0.0925447433944 31% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0374263922625 0.071462118173 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0597756383827 0.151781067708 39% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0388165219042 0.0609392437508 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.5 12.6369458128 154% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 21.74 53.1260098522 41% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 14.6 6.54236453202 223% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.2 10.9458128079 148% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 18.57 11.5310837438 161% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.71 8.32886699507 141% => OK
difficult_words: 126.0 55.0591133005 229% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 23.0 9.94827586207 231% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.3980295567 112% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.5123152709 114% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.5 Out of 90
---------------------
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.