Some people think that schools should teach/enroll students according to their academic abilities, while others believe that it is better to have students with different abilities/skills studying together. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
There is a widespread perception that students should be grouped and taught based on their levels of academic aptitudes. Meanwhile, other people are of the opinion that a mixed-level educational system would be more effective. From my perspective, both views have their own merits and deserve thorough scrutiny.
There are various reasons why streaming in education is considered a favorable approach. It is true that a blend between students of different levels and abilities can make gifted students feel demotivated and frustrated. The reason is that high-achieving learners are capable of absorbing information more quickly compared to their low-attaining counterparts. It means that high achievers’ pace of learning will be stagnated if they have to wait for the less intelligent ones to understand the same amount of knowledge. Another justification is that attainment groupings could save time for teachers. The truth is that in multiple-level classes, teachers have to spend much time preparing extra materials and lessons that are geared to the needs of individual students. What is more, without much disparity in students’ academic competence, educators can make the best use of their teaching resources and pedagogical methods. For this reason, a tracking program would prove to be useful in spurring learners’ intellectual growth.
On the other hand, there are those who maintain that a non-grouped setting could be a more preferred learning environment for pupils. One possible reason for their argument is that ability grouping might engender inferiority complex among underperforming tracks who may self-label themselves as “nerdy groups”. This would significantly undermine their self-esteem, subsequently leading to indiscipline, disruptive behavior or even truancy. It should also be noted that teachers of lower streams have low expectations towards the students’ learning outcomes, thereby not providing them with adequate challenge to push forward in their academic careers. As a result, students’ academic performance could be severely impacted. At the same time, if low-achieving pupils are given opportunities to learn with smarter ones, they will try their best in order not to lag behind, which in turn benefit their progression.
In sum, for the reasons mentioned above, I would argue that a multiple-level training program could bring about more positive outcomes than a phasing one. The mixture of students of varying academic abilities could therefore enhance schooling quality.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-08 | vuongthaolinh | 73 | view |
| 2023-08-01 | linhlinh123 | 73 | view |
| 2023-06-20 | thaonguyendeptraihetcuu | 78 | view |
| 2023-03-01 | minhhuy1000 | 67 | view |
| 2023-02-28 | hi.nguyn91 | 84 | view |
- Nowadays there is a trend that reports of media focus on problems and emergencies rather than positive development Some people think it is harmful to individuals and to society To what extent do you agree or disagree 95
- It is impossible to help all people around the world in need so governments should focus on people from their own country To what extent do you agree or disagree 93
- Some cities create housing areas by providing taller buildings Others create housing by building houses on a wider area of land What solution is better 82
- Young people are now spending more and more time and money following fashion trends What is your opinion Is this a positive or negative development 89
- Water resources around the world are falling deficient Analyze the possible reasons and provide your suggestions 89
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, may, so, therefore, while, as a result, it is true, what is more, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 13.1623246493 160% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 7.85571142285 216% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 7.30460921844 205% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 33.0 24.0651302605 137% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 41.0 41.998997996 98% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2151.0 1615.20841683 133% => OK
No of words: 378.0 315.596192385 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.69047619048 5.12529762239 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.40933352052 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.13609470569 2.80592935109 112% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 176.041082164 132% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.616402116402 0.561755894193 110% => OK
syllable_count: 654.3 506.74238477 129% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 16.0721442886 118% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.7366990844 49.4020404114 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.210526316 106.682146367 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8947368421 20.7667163134 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.89473684211 7.06120827912 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.67935871743 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.216725118636 0.244688304435 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0688364424109 0.084324248473 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0636241792622 0.0667982634062 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.142565798272 0.151304729494 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.041588020401 0.056905535591 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 13.0946893788 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 50.2224549098 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.72 12.4159519038 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.93 8.58950901804 116% => OK
difficult_words: 128.0 78.4519038076 163% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => 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.