Competition for high grades seriously limits the quality of learning at all levels of education
The claim suggests that across all variations of education, competition for high grades can only do harm do the education and nothing good. It might look reasonable at first glance that worrying only about grades is deleterious to the quality of education in general, however, if we take a deeper examination of the problem, I think it would be an overestimate to say that working for high grades will impose limitation of education across all levels.
First, I concede that for education of younger children, just focusing on academic grades will not serve the full purpose of education at a younger age. Since students at that age are required to learn about social norms, critical thinking and other skills that might be useful for their future lives, evaluating that knowledge on a basis of grades is not likely to help them acquire those skills fully. Just like children in kindergarten, although they are required to learn about numbers and some of the basics of mathematics, such learnings are more based on the premises to build a common sense, which will be helpful in their future. A grading system based on their performance of mathematics, thus, will not be suitable for a lower level education. Instead of helping them build a sense of numbers, and potentially foster their interest about math in the future, focusing on grading, because of the emphasis on scores rather than interest, is likely to do harm to the desired goal for lower level education.
On the other hand, however, the goal for higher education is drastically different from that of lower age education, and this difference suggests that evaluating students based on grades can be efficient and fair. Unlike the lower-age education, more advanced education, such as undergraduate and graduate schools, are based more on academic skills rather than social skills, which might not be evaluated clearly on grades. Take the same subject of math, for example. At a college level, students will be required to take some courses in calculus. Unlike the common sense and interest build process at a younger age, college students who take calculus are expected to acquire the academic skills, which can hardly be evaluated efficiently other than the method of grades. Thus, for higher education, I think it is efficient and fair to evaluate students based on grade level.
Moreover, the grade system today’s higher education is tailored to meet the goal of different courses. Such customizations will, to a large extent, capture the goals intended by the school or the class, and the score will reflect a balanced performance of the student. Thus, when students are working toward a higher score, he or she will be working towards to goals as well. Take the engineering programs in almost every universities in the US for example; since engineering is a highly practical area that requires real-world experience, other than the grade based on examinations, schools also incorporate lab courses, which are also evaluated in the final grades for the students. Likewise, art students are also expected to incorporate what they learned in their products other than only memorizing the skills they are required. Therefore, based on the comprehensive requirement for gradings, competition for a higher grade at a high-level education will not likely pose any limitations on the end result.
After all, it would be unfair to treat grades uniformly as a limit to the quality of education across all education. Since different level education have different expectations on the students, although in some situations, only pursuing higher grades can do harm to the quality. But for higher education in general, such worries are redundant.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 494, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...are required to learn about numbers and some of the basics of mathematics, such learnings a...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1017, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...pose any limitations on the end result. After all, it would be unfair to treat g...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 345, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...in general, such worries are redundant.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, likewise, look, moreover, so, therefore, thus, well, after all, for example, i think, in general, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.5258426966 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.4196629213 145% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.3162921348 141% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 33.0505617978 100% => OK
Preposition: 84.0 58.6224719101 143% => OK
Nominalization: 28.0 12.9106741573 217% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3107.0 2235.4752809 139% => OK
No of words: 605.0 442.535393258 137% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.13553719008 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.95951083803 4.55969084622 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77635571975 2.79657885939 99% => OK
Unique words: 260.0 215.323595506 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.429752066116 0.4932671777 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 997.2 704.065955056 142% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 3.10617977528 290% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 23.0359550562 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 73.618291834 60.3974514979 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 141.227272727 118.986275619 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.5 23.4991977007 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.04545454545 5.21951772744 135% => 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 : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.352903733186 0.243740707755 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.121420037831 0.0831039109588 146% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100815663471 0.0758088955206 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.239566800591 0.150359130593 159% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0879830682363 0.0667264976115 132% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 14.1392134831 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 48.8420337079 90% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.83 12.1639044944 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.5 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 135.0 100.480337079 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 21.0 11.8971910112 177% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.2143820225 114% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => 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.