Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Students can learn as much by watching films as they learn by reading books
Whether students can learn as much by watching films as they learn by reading books arouses a heated debate. While different people hold different perspectives about this issue, I still agree that watching videos can help students learn as much. My reasons are as follows.
To begin with, while it is true that books can provide people detailed topics, films can often teach students skills outside of books. Consequently, films can be treated as a supplementary materials. For example, my high school English teacher let us watch American and British movies during the recess. Students learned several dissimilarities among American English and British English, such as the different spelling of color and colour. In addition, they learned several American slangs and coloquialisms, like the word "duh" is used to express stupidity. These special words are nearly impossible to be acquired from standard textbooks. As a result, students understood colloquial English more after relishing these movies. Contrarily, reading classical English literatures only improve students' formal English skills. Due to this reason, while I don't deny that people can gain a significant amount of understanding from books or articles, learning by watching films can also bring them a great deal of knowledge, especially ones that are impossible to learn from books.
In addition, watching films can undoubtedly assists students in learning a concept faster. This is because videos and documentaries are usually made for non-professional enthusiasts, so producers usually use non-complex and easy-to-understand terms to explain a difficult topic. As an example, my biology teacher let us watch an etymological documentary about caterpillars, and we learned the overall concept of what caterpillars eat, the processes of metamorphosis, as well as how butterflies attract their mates though the video. Therefore, we understood most knowledge about butterflies and caterpillars in no more than 30 minutes. On the other hand, if my teacher asked us to read caterpillar concepts from four-hundred pages biology textbooks, then students certainly need more than 4 months to digesting them thoroughly. As a result, even though students can gained a more comprehensive understanding about butterflies' transformation, it might took them no less than three per every day figuring out details about metamorphosis and memorizing butterfly organs. Evidently, while it is true that books can provide students solid details about a certain topic, learning from videos help them save a significant amount of time.
In conclusion, I agree that people can acquire the similar amount of knowledge from films and reading books due to the aforementioned reasons.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 190, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'material'?
Suggestion: material
...films can be treated as a supplementary materials. For example, my high school English te...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 863, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...ish skills. Due to this reason, while I dont deny that people can gain a significant...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, if, so, still, then, therefore, thus, well, while, for example, in addition, in conclusion, such as, as a result, as well as, it is true, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 15.1003584229 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 9.8082437276 133% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 13.8261648746 80% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.0286738351 54% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 33.0 43.0788530466 77% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 52.1666666667 88% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 8.0752688172 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2328.0 1977.66487455 118% => OK
No of words: 416.0 407.700716846 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.59615384615 4.8611393121 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.51620172871 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.16232151542 2.67179642975 118% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 212.727598566 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.540865384615 0.524837075471 103% => OK
syllable_count: 693.9 618.680645161 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 9.59856630824 104% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 10.0 3.51792114695 284% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.1344086022 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.5849816374 48.9658058833 124% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.4 100.406767564 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8 20.6045352989 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.75 5.45110844103 179% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.88709677419 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.353174921309 0.236089414692 150% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.117020696527 0.076458572812 153% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.125018487251 0.0737576698707 169% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.259948294458 0.150856017488 172% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.11749636531 0.0645574589148 182% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 11.7677419355 130% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 58.1214874552 74% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.1575268817 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.2 10.9000537634 139% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.54 8.01818996416 107% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 86.8835125448 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.002688172 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.0537634409 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.