The government wants to improve the education of high school, and there are two plans：
1 choose a group of good teachers and train them first, and after that let them go back to schools and train other teachers.
2 provide training for every teacher online, providing online materials and letting them study individually.
The trade-off between the face-to-face training and online training has always been in the limelight of people’s discussion on education in recent years, and the training for teachers is not exclusive. Given the limited government resources, if one plan has to be chosen, I would definitely go for the first proposal which trains teachers face to face. Actually, the former plan has benefits which the latter could never bring.
To begin with, face-to-face presence could greatly ensure teachers’ concentration on the training. It is undeniable that the trainees’ full participation is the one of the key factors in the success of education. Well, the truth is that face-to-face training programs have much better trainee’s participation than online training programs. A research conducted by some psychologists showed that trainees tended to do more personal affairs when they were taught through the Internet compared with when they are taught in class. Moreover, in the online environment, people were more relaxed and easily to be absent-minded. All those factors resulted in people less focused on the training if they were in an online program. Yet on face-to-face occasion such as a typical class, trainees have to interact with the instructor constantly by means of, say, eye contact and verbal communication. Hence, being trained with direct contact with the trainer obliges the teachers to think more actively and help generate better teachers’ performance.
In addition to that, face-to-face training serves better in solving the teachers’ confusions and problems instantly. Typically, the function of a class or a training session is not only to give cold skills and knowledge, but also to answer the questions of the participants. Personally, I would spend about 10 minutes on average in asking the instructor some questions and listening to the explanations. For most trainees, it is inevitable to have some confusion in the course, so the process during which they turn to their instructor for some help is in fact an indispensable part in a training session. However, without immediate instructions, providing training for every teacher online, offering them online materials and letting them studying individually neglect such an important part. As a consequence, the teachers have to withhold their confusion, carrying the questions remaining to be answered into their teaching experience. In such situations, how the quality of education can be ensured?
The second plan, certainly, does have some advantages which excel the first plan, albeit the first plan has more feasibility overall. The most obvious merit of providing training online is the preferable reduction of the cost. To arrange the traditional face-to-face training, the government has to rent the classroom, buy the materials and cover the transport cost of the teachers. Thus, only part of the teachers could be directly trained given limited fund. Training online, on the contrary, requires nothing for the room and transport, which will spare a lot, so all the teachers could be covered directly by the program. Notwithstanding that the number of teachers trained is limited due to the cost if the first plan is implemented, if the government adopts some measures, the training could still work well as if all the teachers are directly covered. As is mentioned in the plan, only good teachers are chosen in the training group. Since good teachers are quite skilled at teaching, we could be confident in their training the other teachers.
To sum up, although the online plan could cover all the teachers, the first is more likely to work well. Therefore, it is advisable for the government to accept the first plan.
Discourse Markers used:
['actually', 'also', 'but', 'first', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'moreover', 'second', 'so', 'still', 'therefore', 'thus', 'well', 'as to', 'in addition', 'in fact', 'such as', 'on the contrary', 'to begin with', 'to sum up']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.236652236652 0.229887763892 103% => OK
Verbs: 0.167388167388 0.158761421928 105% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0721500721501 0.0866891130778 83% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0519480519481 0.046263068375 112% => OK
Pronouns: 0.023088023088 0.0685040099705 34% => OK
Prepositions: 0.111111111111 0.118717715034 94% => OK
Participles: 0.0548340548341 0.0351676179071 156% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.91473686265 2.67179642975 109% => OK
Infinitives: 0.038961038961 0.0309702414327 126% => OK
Particles: 0.001443001443 0.00188951952338 76% => OK
Determiners: 0.116883116883 0.0887237588012 132% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.015873015873 0.0209618222197 76% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.011544011544 0.0139019557991 83% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3743.0 2387.08602151 157% => OK
No of words: 604.0 408.028673835 148% => OK
Chars per words: 6.19701986755 5.86048508987 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.95746018188 4.48200974243 111% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.380794701987 0.338922669872 112% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.307947019868 0.251872472559 122% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.241721854305 0.174417080927 139% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.140728476821 0.112833075102 125% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91473686265 2.67179642975 109% => OK
Unique words: 286.0 212.727598566 134% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.473509933775 0.524397521467 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 57.9940385324 59.2087087015 98% => OK
How many sentences: 28.0 20.6684587814 135% => OK
Sentence length: 21.5714285714 20.5533526081 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.9747144414 48.84282405 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.678571429 120.699889404 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5714285714 20.5533526081 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.75 0.644075263715 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.5376344086 110% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.54480286738 0% => OK
Readability: 52.3661305582 45.7405998639 114% => OK
Elegance: 1.66071428571 1.45489161554 114% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.401598047192 0.300154397459 134% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.133067979318 0.103427244359 129% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0778746854992 0.0752933317313 103% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.560037664935 0.497263757937 113% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.145445310989 0.151897553556 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.169025449919 0.114077575197 148% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0647520608832 0.0781384742642 83% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.564389679759 0.336927656856 168% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0406302806739 0.067059652881 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.299080694828 0.210909579961 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0427983287158 0.0618886996521 69% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 17.0 11.8870967742 143% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.86379928315 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.91756272401 142% => OK
Positive topic words: 10.0 8.42114695341 119% => OK
Negative topic words: 4.0 2.4623655914 162% => OK
Neutral topic words: 5.0 2.75985663082 181% => OK
Total topic words: 19.0 13.6433691756 139% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Less content wanted. Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.