Technology is becoming increasingly prevalent in the world today. In the
not too distant future, technology will completely replace the teacher in the
classroom. Do you agree or disagree with this statement?
The use of technology is increasing rapidly in the modern world. Growing technological influence can even be seen in the classroom. Despite this, I disagree that technology will completely replace human teachers in the foreseeable future. Analyzing
the inability of a technology-driven teacher to both cater to student learning needs
and instill motivation will show this.
Firstly, a teacher powered by artificial intelligence would have difficulty interpreting the educational needs of a classroom of students. For example, Honda Asimov, one of the world’s most advanced robots, has trouble distinguishing simple human
emotions. If today’s most advanced artificial intelligence cannot categorize these
basic physical cues, it is difficult to believe that a robot could be capable of altering
study plans and teaching styles in a dynamic classroom setting. Thus, this makes it
clear that a technology-driven teacher is not going to be operational anytime in the
near future.
Secondly, a robotic teacher would not be able to establish the emotional connection
needed to motivate students. The American scientific theory of education plays
a good example here. This widely supported theory argues that young learners are
most motivated when they share an emotional relationship with their instructor. As
most would agree expecting children to form emotional ties to machinery is unrealistic,
the argument that technology will replace the teacher in the classroom can be debunked.
In summary, a robotic teacher would lack the classroom dynamism and emotional
intelligence needed to be an effective instructor. Thus, it is clear why having a class
run entirely by a machine is an idea that will not be realized anytime soon. As this
essay has shown, computer technology will not replace traditional human teachers
in the foreseeable future.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, if, second, secondly, so, still, thus, for example, in summary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 7.85571142285 165% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 10.4138276553 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 41.998997996 69% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1599.0 1615.20841683 99% => OK
No of words: 282.0 315.596192385 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.67021276596 5.12529762239 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09790868904 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.14105340421 2.80592935109 112% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 176.041082164 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.567375886525 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 499.5 506.74238477 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 8.0 2.52805611222 316% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.1110150149 49.4020404114 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.6 106.682146367 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.8 20.7667163134 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.2 7.06120827912 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 19.0 4.38176352705 434% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.295226588276 0.244688304435 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.111594862222 0.084324248473 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0927247403054 0.0667982634062 139% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0832413764681 0.151304729494 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0922405467921 0.056905535591 162% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 13.0946893788 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.28 50.2224549098 72% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.61 12.4159519038 126% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.18 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 78.4519038076 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum five paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.