Over the past decades, the emergence of technology such as the Internet and mobile devices has revolutionised the way of enrichment and cultivation. Given the trend of translating from attending lecture in hall into laptop installed at home, some commentators prognosticate that conventional teachers are likely to be rendered obsolete in foreseeable future. However, I would contend that teachers remain crucial in academic realm. This essay is set to elaborate my position.
First of all, the technology, in whatever degree it can evolve, is requiring the assistance from human. Admittedly, with the content already embedded in these learning platforms, the programme can be employed ceaselessly in subsequent decades. However, it is the curriculum itself is perceived as the most vital component of this cutting-edge educational system. Consequently, the design of such agenda counts on the teaching experience to understand the cognitive ability of particular student, which is highly unlikely to be delegate to machines.
Meanwhile, an equally essential counterparts of cultivation is life enrichment, which in turn makes teacher irreplaceable. Despite the utilisation of leading technology that can keep tracking students' behaviour, disciplinary actions entailing solicitous enquiry and consultation are not purely mechanical works that automation is qualified. Therefore, the intelligence endowed in such learning platforms, unequivocally, excels in facilitating collaboration and placing enormous materials sequentially for students' revision, yet works other than that still constitutes the onus of traditional teacher with emotional sensation.
In conclusion, I would defend that teachers are indispensable. In the future, institution are lobbied to adopt the technology in a more judicious way that can mitigate the burden encountered by teachers instead of substitute them.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, first, however, if, so, still, therefore, while, in conclusion, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 24.0651302605 71% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.3376753507 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1624.0 1615.20841683 101% => OK
No of words: 270.0 315.596192385 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.01481481481 5.12529762239 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.05360046442 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.36417012108 2.80592935109 120% => OK
Unique words: 180.0 176.041082164 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.666666666667 0.561755894193 119% => OK
syllable_count: 520.2 506.74238477 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => 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: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.8403124656 49.4020404114 133% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.923076923 106.682146367 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7692307692 20.7667163134 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.61538461538 7.06120827912 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.67935871743 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 3.4128256513 205% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.145079641572 0.244688304435 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0414916244009 0.084324248473 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0327296013983 0.0667982634062 49% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0841284644281 0.151304729494 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0357946200074 0.056905535591 63% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.3 13.0946893788 132% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 25.8 50.2224549098 51% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.58 12.4159519038 142% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.59 8.58950901804 135% => OK
difficult_words: 119.0 78.4519038076 152% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 18.0 10.7795591182 167% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.