Educators should base their assessment of students' learning not on students' grasp of facts but on the ability to explain the ideas, trends, and concepts that those facts illustrate.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
The statement contends that the "students' ability to explain and apply the facts that they have learned" should be the basis of assessment rather than the grasp of the facts. Before making any decision on the basis of assessment, it is important to define the goal of education. What is the purpose of education? It is to provide students with skills and knowledge that allow them to contribute toward the development of society, along with the fundamental moral values that one should not forget for his lifetime. Keeping this goal in mind, I agree with the statement's claim for the following reasons.
First, choosing the ability of students to apply their fact-based knowledge to practical problems will be of paramount importance to fight the problem of rote learning. Many countries, especially developing countries like India, have an education system that requires students to memorize the facts and write the same in exams to get good grades. This kind of education not only undermines the main goal of education but also adversely affects students' practical skills later in their careers. Few would disagree that students who pass out from this subjective learning approach tend to face a lot of problems when it comes to applying what they know to real-world problems in university projects, or in the field.
Secondly, it may seem that a good grasp of the facts of the subject will only add to the students' pool of knowledge, but it is not actually the case because of stratospheric expectations of grades from parents, teachers, and educational institutions for college admission. This rat-race of grades has led students to even avoid the learning - by taking shortcuts, crash courses, etc.- just for the sake of good grades in exams. With the rote-learning approach to education, getting high grades is directly proportional to students' memory power. The more facts they can remember, the higher grades they can get. Such high grades have little value if students do not know the practical applications of the facts.
One may argue that, how would educators assess the practical knowledge of their students? The answer is simple, by including more practical tests to assess the students. It is true that completely replacing the theoretical tests is not viable when we consider the importance of knowing the facts in the first place in order to apply them to an actual problem. However, it would help if educators increase the currently negligible number of practical examinations to assess the real field knowledge of students.
In the view of the above, the statement's proposition seems reasonable to choose the students' knowledge of practical applicability of the facts rather than mere memorization of facts. This will help educators correctly assess the abilities of their students while contributing toward the end goal of the education.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 85, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'students'' or 'student's'?
Suggestion: students'; student's
...position seems reasonable to choose the students knowledge of practical applicability of...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, while, kind of, it is true, in the first place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 19.5258426966 51% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 33.0505617978 103% => OK
Preposition: 75.0 58.6224719101 128% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 12.9106741573 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2414.0 2235.4752809 108% => OK
No of words: 465.0 442.535393258 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.19139784946 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64369019777 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84509865915 2.79657885939 102% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 215.323595506 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.501075268817 0.4932671777 102% => OK
syllable_count: 729.0 704.065955056 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.4304797124 60.3974514979 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.7 118.986275619 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.25 23.4991977007 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.7 5.21951772744 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.249051527526 0.243740707755 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0786570816636 0.0831039109588 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0471441891991 0.0758088955206 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.148323487098 0.150359130593 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0286912859216 0.0667264976115 43% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.1392134831 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.8420337079 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.12 12.1639044944 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.65 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 100.480337079 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 79.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.75 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.