Some people think it is important for children to take lessons outside the classroom, for example, by visiting processes such as local companies or public buildings. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Many individuals are in favour of innovative learning experience by taking children to nearby local companies or public buildings, as they provide practical knowledge to them. I support this perspective. This essay intends to discuss how this approach has an edge of the traditional way of teaching.
First of all, the traditional schooling systems are monotonous and sooner or later, pupils find it boring and lack the interest in learning. If the kids are taken to public building like a zoo, museum or a library, it is effortless for the kids to imbibe the idea and it will stay in the mind forever. It is also a fact that visually displayed truths are grasped easily by the kids and, those pupils who can visualize are outperforming the normal who mug up the points. So by taking the kids to the public places, they can inculcate the same strategy for better performance among children.
Furthermore, field trips to local businesses can introduce pupils to the practical component of learning, which is not available in schools. This can give students the real hands-on experience of the world of work. All the students should be given an internship opportunity to enrich their education, and this must be a part of the curriculum.
Finally, relationships between teachers and students are often transformed by field trips. The students and teacher become closer and help them to understand in a better sense. That could be life-changing, as two get connected well with each other and has positive results afterwards.
To conclude, most children benefit significantly from such educational tours. Therefore, school authorities should encourage childrent o visit local business or public buildings in order to make education more creative and exciting.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, furthermore, if, so, therefore, well, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => 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: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 41.998997996 88% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1479.0 1615.20841683 92% => OK
No of words: 285.0 315.596192385 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.18947368421 5.12529762239 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10876417139 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92347457678 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 176.041082164 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.628070175439 0.561755894193 112% => OK
syllable_count: 451.8 506.74238477 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.76152304609 21% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.1799286543 49.4020404114 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.6 106.682146367 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0 20.7667163134 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.8 7.06120827912 68% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.132861138954 0.244688304435 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0382813608512 0.084324248473 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0529184402574 0.0667982634062 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0651968174772 0.151304729494 43% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0491604088066 0.056905535591 86% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 13.0946893788 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 50.2224549098 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.82 12.4159519038 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.07 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 78.4519038076 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => 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.