Claim: Group assignments that students must work together to complete should replace a substantial amount of traditional lecture-based instruction in college and university courses.
Reason: It is vital for students to gain experience collaborating with peers to study a topic and to achieve a common goal.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.
The view that student must work together as peers to achieve a common goal is really a connective phase for growth to happen. Students in both colleges and universities are introduced to various types of learning (which can be direct or indirect) that enables them to gain skills and knowledge in their field of study.
Direct teaching in this argument is also referred as traditional-based instruction as it involves a teacher-student learning experience through the use of projectors, scheme of work, learning materials etc. to pass on information and skills to students, whereas the indirect teaching requires a collaborative experience where students cooperate in groups to rub minds by creating ideas that fits the topic of interest given. An example of direct learning or traditional-based instruction is a teacher in front of a classroom passing on knowledge and that of indirect learning is a classroom presentation of various groups of students given a particular topic to discuss on.
As many have been given the opportunity to gain knowledge in various ways and techniques, the idea behind lecturers ensuring student to collaborate with one another is for them to identify problems from various points of view, helping them to critically think and analyze a problem by proffering solutions as it encourages teamwork and supports unity among members of a particular group. For instance, master's students were given a research assignment topic on assessment of plant species diversity in a local community. The students were able to come up with an idea that a Shannon-wiener diversity index is an ideal technique for assessing the abundance and richness of the plant species which serves as a means of conservation for plant species.
Group reading is part of a collaborative work as it helps to broaden many students' horizon by improving their IQs and giving them the opportunity to multi-task beyond their capability. However, many lecturers find it difficult to give collaborative assignments due to the fact that some student hardly indulge themselves in activities that would help them improve in areas that are difficult for them to assimilate. Hence this can create a form of laziness resulting to a lower IQ in the field of study.
There are more to collaborative learning and teamwork than replacing a substantial traditional lecture-based instruction as I am convinced that this has served as a medium to improve growth by encouraging individuals to become an expertise in their field helping them achieve a common goal of similar interest.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 126, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to experience'
Suggestion: to experience
... it involves a teacher-student learning experience through the use of projectors, scheme o...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 75, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'students'' or 'student's'?
Suggestion: students'; student's
...rative work as it helps to broaden many students horizon by improving their IQs and givi...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 417, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...t are difficult for them to assimilate. Hence this can create a form of laziness resu...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, hence, however, if, really, so, whereas, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.4196629213 32% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 33.0505617978 88% => OK
Preposition: 68.0 58.6224719101 116% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2160.0 2235.4752809 97% => OK
No of words: 411.0 442.535393258 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.25547445255 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50256981431 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.15986367238 2.79657885939 113% => OK
Unique words: 208.0 215.323595506 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.506082725061 0.4932671777 103% => OK
syllable_count: 676.8 704.065955056 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 6.24550561798 0% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 20.2370786517 59% => 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 23.0359550562 148% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 77.9940791912 60.3974514979 129% => OK
Chars per sentence: 180.0 118.986275619 151% => OK
Words per sentence: 34.25 23.4991977007 146% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.91666666667 5.21951772744 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.312157822762 0.243740707755 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.113306780052 0.0831039109588 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.044119763732 0.0758088955206 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.164974971365 0.150359130593 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0346173182418 0.0667264976115 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 20.5 14.1392134831 145% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.97 48.8420337079 76% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.6 12.1743820225 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.82 12.1639044944 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.47 8.38706741573 113% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 100.480337079 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 15.6 11.2143820225 139% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.