Many people believe that formal “pen and paper” examinations are not the best method of assessing educational achievement. Discuss this view and give your own opinion.
Educational achievements are usually equaled with the performance of a candidate in a written examination. It is often argued that , they do not accurately reflect the knowledge and new methods should be put in place. I support this thought. This essay will discuss how text based knowledge does not suffice in some areas of expertise and unreliable human evaluation of the pen and paper tests along with relevant examples to support my points.
To begin with, there is ample evidence that marks secured by traditional handwritten examination is not an appropriate parameter to gauge an individual’s understanding of education in this contemporary world. The central reason for this is, it could only validate theoretical knowledge but not the application of it. Organizations and educational boards therefore demand a mix of practical examinations of the subjects such as biology and chemistry along with projects driven assessment that reflects the true learning and excellence of students there forth. To illustrate this, an Oxford University report suggests that, 80% of organizations prefer canditates with multiple projects on their CV with average marks rather than individuals securing a distinction in their exams. Therefore it is conclusively clear that the world is slowly moving away from pen and paper based to a more holistic valuation of student’s performance.
Secondly, there is a diminishing credibility of evaluation. Many factors influence the score of the examination with evaluation being the most impactful one. The auditors who value the exam paper are often criticized for being laidback and not efficient with large discrepancy observed from one auditor to other. For example, it has been noticed that the marks of students are modified when applied for re-valuation of the paper, when they deemed to be not satisfied underlining the negligence in the first instance. Thus it is possible to state that a more robust and lesser error prone alternative such as computer based examinations are the way forward as the error rate is comparatively lower than human corrections.
To sum up, with advancements in technology and increased competition there is a need for an overhaul change in how we asses an individual’s education accomplishments such as migrating to a computer based and also including practical and projects in the criteria.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 131, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...ten examination. It is often argued that , they do not accurately reflect the know...
^^
Line 2, column 779, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
... securing a distinction in their exams. Therefore it is conclusively clear that the world...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 519, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
... the negligence in the first instance. Thus it is possible to state that a more rob...
^^^^
Line 4, column 263, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...practical and projects in the criteria.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, for example, such as, to begin with, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 13.1623246493 144% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 41.998997996 112% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 8.3376753507 252% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2001.0 1615.20841683 124% => OK
No of words: 371.0 315.596192385 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.3935309973 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38877662729 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.17561649452 2.80592935109 113% => OK
Unique words: 216.0 176.041082164 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.582210242588 0.561755894193 104% => OK
syllable_count: 643.5 506.74238477 127% => 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: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 68.2081780695 49.4020404114 138% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.4 106.682146367 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.7333333333 20.7667163134 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.13333333333 7.06120827912 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.01903807615 80% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => 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: 0.146290440525 0.244688304435 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0492351704198 0.084324248473 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.029826145679 0.0667982634062 45% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0827841991606 0.151304729494 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0451750014858 0.056905535591 79% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 13.0946893788 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 50.2224549098 77% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.28 12.4159519038 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.93 8.58950901804 116% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 78.4519038076 153% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.