As computers are being used more and more in education, there will be soon no role for teachers in the classroom.
There is no doubt that education and the learning process has changed since the introduction of computers: The search for information has become easier and amusing, and connectivity has expedited the data availability. Though {tooltip}experts{end-link}expert{end-tooltip} systems have made computers more intelligent, they have not yet become a substitute of the human interaction in the learning process. In my opinion what can be expected is a change of the teachers’ role, but not their disappearance from the classroom.
Nobody can argue that the acquisition of knowledge is more fun and easier with computers. The mere activity of touching and exploring this device constitutes an enjoyable task for a child. This, accompanied by the relaxing attitude and software interactivity, usually contributes to a better grasping of new knowledge. At a higher educational level the availability of digital books, simulators and other academic materials provide the student with an ever accessible source of information, that otherwise would not be at hand.
But, besides the increasing complexity and behavior of intelligent software, which is usually embedded in the academic digital material, the need for human interaction in the learning process will always be present, at least in the foreseeable future. There is the necessity for a human being to be able to determine what the {tooltip}specifics{end-link}specific{end-tooltip} needs of each individual are. The expertise of a teacher in how to explain and adapt complex concepts to different individuals can hardly be mimicked by a computer, no matter how sophisticated its software is.
As computers are becoming a common tool for teaching, teachers should be more aware of their role as guides in the acquisition of knowledge rather than transmitters of facts. They have to be open minded to the changes that are taking {tooltip}places{end-link}place{end-tooltip}, keep updated and serve as problem solvers in the learning process, thus allowing students to discover the {tooltip}fact{end-link}facts{end-tooltip} for themselves.
To summarize, in my personal view, teachers play and will continue to play an important role in the classroom, especially at the primary level. No matter how complex computers become, there will be no replacement for the human interaction, but in the {tooltip}way haw this{end-link}way this{end-tooltip} interaction takes place.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, if, so, thus, at least, no doubt, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 13.1623246493 137% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 41.998997996 110% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2081.0 1615.20841683 129% => OK
No of words: 358.0 315.596192385 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.81284916201 5.12529762239 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34981470047 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 5.23627994819 2.80592935109 187% => OK
Unique words: 202.0 176.041082164 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.564245810056 0.561755894193 100% => OK
syllable_count: 641.7 506.74238477 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 51.3972622951 49.4020404114 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 148.642857143 106.682146367 139% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5714285714 20.7667163134 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.35714285714 7.06120827912 62% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.292633581444 0.244688304435 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.103820789219 0.084324248473 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0705654721844 0.0667982634062 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.171689655373 0.151304729494 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0457167819274 0.056905535591 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.7 13.0946893788 143% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 29.18 50.2224549098 58% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 11.3001002004 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.71 12.4159519038 135% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.77 8.58950901804 114% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 78.4519038076 141% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 9.78957915832 133% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.