Do you agree or disagree that giving every member of a group the same grade is a good way to evaluate students?
Group projects have been a kind of work that almost everyone will take someday in the future no matter which field you dive in, therefore, it has been attached more and more attention and many high schools and universities are going to require students to finish several group projects to get credits of courses, which leads to a heated discussion, how to give every member of a group score in a more sensible way. Some professors give a group of students the same score based on the overall performance. However, from my perspective, it is not a sensible way since it can’t evaluate students’ performance fairly and may have bad effects on their future work.
What must be prioritized is that the score, acting the role of evaluating students’ academic performance, is important in today’s education. The more fair and more accurate the scores students get, the more they benefir from it, instructing them to improve themselves. To begin with, there is no doubt that different students make different efforts in their projects even though working as a group. Some members devote themselves to the project, spending over 10 hours a week in discussing and researching while other members spend over 10 hours a week playing their computer games, leaving what they ought to do on others’ shoulder. It is unfair to give those two kinds of students above the same score; in contrast, students are going to have a semse of being treated equaly, which benefits their mental health.
What should be equally worth discussing is that grading members of a group the same score is going to foster an inappropriate idea of how the society evaluates their work when they are working in a group. To begin with, it is going to decrease students’ enthusiasm in contributing to a group project as much as they can. We can imagine how frustrated a student will be when he gets a bad grade after fighting for a group day and night without anybody in his group joining in and helping him, which is not an exaggerate but a true case I have been through.
Giving a score without observing different quantities of work done be different members is supposed to frustrate them while boosting those people who haven’t contributed a little, giving them an ridiculous sense of how easy to get an acceptable score. It seems to concentrate too much on the result, giving scores based on the overall performance rather than paying enough attention to what they are doing which is a more advisable attitude towards work from my perspective.
Fairness of scores marked individually gives students the appropriate evaluation on their work. A reasonable notion to the cooperation, which can be helped to cultivated by adopting a more advisable method to give scores rather than grading a score to all members of a group benefiting students’ future career. In a nutshell, giving members of a group the same score is certainly an inappropriate method and there must be other ways to give scores more reasonable.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 506, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...oining in and helping him, which is not an exaggerate but a true case I have been through. G...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 193, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...ven’t contributed a little, giving them an ridiculous sense of how easy to get an ...
^^
Line 9, column 9, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ds work from my perspective. Fairness of scores marked individually gives stud...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, may, so, therefore, thus, while, in contrast, kind of, no doubt, of course, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 15.1003584229 172% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 9.8082437276 112% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 13.8261648746 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.0286738351 118% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 43.0788530466 86% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 52.1666666667 134% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.0752688172 111% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2497.0 1977.66487455 126% => OK
No of words: 507.0 407.700716846 124% => OK
Chars per words: 4.92504930966 4.8611393121 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.74517233601 4.48103885553 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76631420333 2.67179642975 104% => OK
Unique words: 245.0 212.727598566 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.483234714004 0.524837075471 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 774.0 618.680645161 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 9.59856630824 63% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.51792114695 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.6003584229 78% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 31.0 20.1344086022 154% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 77.6536531256 48.9658058833 159% => OK
Chars per sentence: 156.0625 100.406767564 155% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.6875 20.6045352989 154% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.6875 5.45110844103 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 11.8709677419 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.292419529613 0.236089414692 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.115323466831 0.076458572812 151% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0549330595257 0.0737576698707 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.186175557114 0.150856017488 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.063311490775 0.0645574589148 98% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.6 11.7677419355 150% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.47 58.1214874552 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 10.1575268817 140% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.91 10.9000537634 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.44 8.01818996416 105% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 86.8835125448 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 17.0 10.002688172 170% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.4 10.0537634409 143% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.