Imagine that a professor requires students to learn as much as possible about a subject in a short period of life. Is it better for the professor to require students to work together in a group or is it better to require students to work alone?

Essay topics:

Imagine that a professor requires students to learn as much as possible about a subject in a short period of life. Is it better for the professor to require students to work together in a group or is it better to require students to work alone?

It is conceivable that every teacher all hopes their students can learn most in the class. Therefore, this raises the question that it is better for students to work together or work alone. I take the position that cooperation can benefit the students most.

First, the students can learn more in a group because they can organize what they learn in the class well. To elaborate, when students discuss, they should express their opinions, which will help them think deeply and organize what they want to talk. On the contrary, if students only work alone, then they will lose the best chance for them to rethink their perceptive. Take myself for example. When I was a freshman, my political science professor always encouraged us to work together in a group. In the group, I often expressed my thinking about the lecture. But because I was willing to share my perceptive, before taking out, I should check my idea was in logical reasons and speculate how to express them well. Through this process, I could consider my own opinion deeply, causing me to create other thought-provoking ideas.

Furthermore, by working in a group, students can learn other student's opinion and fully understand the topic. It is inevitable that the teacher has the generation gap with us. Still, if the students can work in the group and discuss the lecture, students can change the teacher's language into students' own language, which makes them can easily realize the lecture. Take my friend Jimmy for instance. He was a hard-working student but had a serious problem about interpreting teacher's language. Thankfully, in the group discussion, he exerted himself listening to teammates' opinions about the lecture, which helped him to review what the teacher said in the lecture and used his language to remember it. Nevertheless, if our school did not have a discussion time, then my friend Jimmy could not take advantage of this time to enhance his learning.

Many people may argue that if students work in a group, it might appear free-riders. However, even if I cannot disavow that the free-rider is a main problem in the cooperation, I insist that we have many ways to solve this problem. For example, the teacher can give the students chances to value their teammates or create some measures to punish free-riders. Hence, we should not become penny wise and pound foolish. The benefits of the teamwork surpluses the disadvantage. We should not because of a little problem to give up a good chance to help students learning.

In conclusion, I hold the belief that the teacher should require students to work together because it can not only help them organize the lecture well but also help students to understand the lecture more. However, we should design some measures to prevent free-riders from happening.

Average: 3 (3 votes)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:


Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 62, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'students'' or 'student's'?
Suggestion: students'; student's in a group, students can learn other students opinion and fully understand the topic....
Line 5, column 271, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'teachers'' or 'teacher's'?
Suggestion: teachers'; teacher's the lecture, students can change the teachers language into students own language, wh...

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, may, nevertheless, so, still, then, therefore, well, for example, for instance, in conclusion, on the contrary

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 15.1003584229 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 23.0 9.8082437276 234% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 11.0 13.8261648746 80% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.0286738351 118% => OK
Pronoun: 63.0 43.0788530466 146% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 51.0 52.1666666667 98% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.0752688172 99% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2339.0 1977.66487455 118% => OK
No of words: 469.0 407.700716846 115% => OK
Chars per words: 4.98720682303 4.8611393121 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65364457471 4.48103885553 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67770223197 2.67179642975 100% => OK
Unique words: 227.0 212.727598566 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.484008528785 0.524837075471 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 702.9 618.680645161 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 17.0 9.59856630824 177% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.51792114695 199% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.94265232975 162% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.6003584229 126% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.2625801167 48.9658058833 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.9615384615 100.406767564 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.0384615385 20.6045352989 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.19230769231 5.45110844103 114% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 11.8709677419 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.85842293907 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.302552034867 0.236089414692 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0873727423541 0.076458572812 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0870899656275 0.0737576698707 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.183960672564 0.150856017488 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0554405681558 0.0645574589148 86% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 11.7677419355 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 58.1214874552 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 10.1575268817 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.37 10.9000537634 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.69 8.01818996416 96% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 86.8835125448 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.002688172 80% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 10.247311828 78% => OK
What are above readability scores?


Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.