Students should always question what they are taught instead of accepting it passively.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing a

Essay topics:

Students should always question what they are taught instead of accepting it passively.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.

It is the questions we ask that shape who we are. Whether in an educational environment or in our everyday interactions, our instinctive curiosity encourages us to ask questions and challenge what we really know. In fact, human progress has been marked by the ubiquitous desire to expand knowledge, such as the relentless endeavours of discovery in the natural sciences over the past 200 years, starting with Charles Darwin and his tremendous advances in the biological sciences. While a significant amount of the knowledge we possess today is inherited, its value depends on our ability to question what we are taught. Only by challenging the findings of our predecessors can we both gain insightful, profound understanding and expand on the existing knowledge base. Therefore, I contend that student should challenge what they are taught instead of accepting it passively.

When students question what they are taught, they understand the content better. By challenging the material, we engage more deeply with the subject matter. For example, a chemical reaction between carbon and oxygen may yield carbon dioxide, but it is only once we understand the chemical process underlying the reaction that we truly master the subject. Only when questioning the reasons why Hitler initiated world conflict do we comprehensively understand the World War, rather than simply knowing about its existence. This is not only vital for understanding the subject, but also foment our capacity for further understanding of the subject. In other words, if students challenge what they are taught, they acquire the tools necessary to independently master new questions brought upon them in the relevant subject.

Most academic subjects are in fact marked by an expansive array of existing knowledge which is impossible to be taught completely. There are thousands of academic working on developing new medical treatments, and one can simply not be taught each single one. If one is to understand these medical treatments independently, we need to rely on the aforementioned tools to master the subject. If we are to learn independently, it is a prerequisite that we challenge what we are taught.

This is also the very process which generates new knowledge for society. In academic fields which have not yet been explored, the tools of active understanding are central. Given that there is no previous knowledge to rely on, one must be able to question the findings to assess their validity. For example, an economist attempting to understand an unusual fluctuation in economic growth must be able to challenge existing knowledge to shed light on the novel phenomenon. Unless society is at a point where no new knowledge can be availed (which is certainly not the case), we will find the active learners to be at the forefront of generating new knowledge.

Moreover, students need to challenge concepts which are taught to them to identify inconsistencies and rectify existing knowledge. It would be fallacious to assume that all current so-called knowledge is true, given that some concepts are even opposing and can therefore not logically both be true! To update what we understand, we must rely on challenging concepts.

Now, a counter argument might be that banal concepts must not be challenged. Take for example the simple addition 1+1, where it would be a pointless endeavour to discern whether any solution other than 2 might have credibility. I admit this to be true, yet maintain that this process of inquiry - regardless of how purposeless it may seem - creates masters of the field and creates independent learners. In other words, individuals should not dedicate excessive time to assess the truthfulness of banal concepts, but still have a confident understanding of the mechanisms behind that knowledge creation.

Consequentially, if students challenge what they are taught they will be able to improve on the knowledge that we currently have.

Lastly, we want our society to consist of individuals that can question what they are told. This transcends the limits of educational institutions: in other situations of everyday life the future generations must be remain inquisitive to be successful in life and to bring our society further in both academic and non-academic realms.

In conclusion, when students challenge what they are taught, they understand the content better. By mastering the topics which they are taught, they acquire the skills for independent learning and future mastery. Only with this independent and active approach can society generate new knowledge and advance our understanding of the world. Moreover, only with the tools acquired by challenging what one is taught can we rectify and update existing knowledge, while ensuring that the individuals in our society are inquisitive in academic and non-academic spheres. Hence, it is the questions we ask that shape the future of our society.

Votes
Average: 10 (2 votes)
Essay Categories

Comments

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, if, lastly, may, moreover, really, so, still, therefore, while, for example, in conclusion, in fact, such as, in other words

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 48.0 19.5258426966 246% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 24.0 12.4196629213 193% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 14.8657303371 141% => OK
Relative clauses : 26.0 11.3162921348 230% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 81.0 33.0505617978 245% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 90.0 58.6224719101 154% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 4166.0 2235.4752809 186% => OK
No of words: 783.0 442.535393258 177% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.32056194125 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.28981447305 4.55969084622 116% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01695050414 2.79657885939 108% => OK
Unique words: 332.0 215.323595506 154% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.424010217114 0.4932671777 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1280.7 704.065955056 182% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 20.0 6.24550561798 320% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 3.10617977528 290% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 8.0 4.38483146067 182% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 35.0 20.2370786517 173% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.5973848966 60.3974514979 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.028571429 118.986275619 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3714285714 23.4991977007 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.05714285714 5.21951772744 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 9.0 4.97078651685 181% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 24.0 10.2758426966 234% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => 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: 0.15143871339 0.243740707755 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0552957689632 0.0831039109588 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0572523703332 0.0758088955206 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0819917864297 0.150359130593 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0372409079216 0.0667264976115 56% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 14.1392134831 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.8420337079 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.87 12.1639044944 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.46 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 185.0 100.480337079 184% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 11.8971910112 130% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.

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.