Educational institutions require students to do projects in groups. Although this practice is very beneficial and helps students perform in groups, but there are some challenges when it comes to evaluating the participants. Some argue that all the students who have participated should be rewarded similarly, while some posit the idea that not all students do the same work in the project and should be evaluated individually. In my opinion, in the group projects, students should be graded based on their contributions. There are several reasons for that.
First of all, it is apparent that some students allocate more time to their studies and work harder. We all have had peers in our classes who are lazy and do not dedicate their time to school and projects. When they are paired with more hard-working students in a project, it gives them an extra reason not to study. If some students work harder and prepare an outstanding project, the lazier students will still be rewarded. It is not fair for the students who have devoted more time and worked harder. They might have sacrificed other classes for this one because they had to carry the work load of another person.
Second of all, clarifying that students who are on the same team will receive scores based on their contributions encourages individual students to work harder to take part. In group projects, based on the time allocated and the skill sets, people contribute to different degrees. If the instructor makes it clear that he/she will give marks based on how well individuals have contributed, not only will it encourage lazier students, but it will also result in more hard-workers not getting discouraged. The more hard-working students might be discouraged if they are rewarded at the same level as others. Individual evaluations can help in preventing that.
All in all, the benefits of group projects are evident. This helps students learn how to communicate with their peers and how to combine their skill sets to tackle problems. When it comes to marking the contributions, the instructors should opt for a way that is not unfair to the participants, encourages the lazier contributors, and does not discourage the hard-working members. The best way to ensure that is through individual evaluations.
|2023-03-01||sonyeoso||90||Read full essay|
|2023-02-18||zaid||73||Read full essay|
|2023-02-10||redark777||76||Read full essay|
|2023-02-03||lolo_7||60||Read full essay|
|2023-01-25||joyce05||60||Read full essay|
- People who develop many different skills are more successful than people who focus on one skill only66
- TPO62 Throughout the world s oceans hard structures such as natural reefs provide ideal marine habitats Reefs provide hard surfaces to which plants coral and sponges can attach and thereby provide food and shelter for many types of fish Recently workers i81
- The yellow crazy ant is one of the world s most destructive invasive species species that are not native to an area but rather introduced to it It has spread to many regions of Earth and caused great damage to native ecosystems In recent decades the crazy85
- do you agree or disagree with the following statement Nowadays people are more willing to help people they don t know for example by giving clothing and food to people who need them than they were in the past Use specific reasons and examples to support y76
- People who develop many different skills are more successful than people who focus on one skill only70
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, second, similarly, so, still, well, while, first of all, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 15.1003584229 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 9.8082437276 122% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 13.8261648746 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.0286738351 145% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 43.0788530466 84% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 52.1666666667 75% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 8.0752688172 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1912.0 1977.66487455 97% => OK
No of words: 376.0 407.700716846 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.08510638298 4.8611393121 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.40348946061 4.48103885553 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85693267027 2.67179642975 107% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 212.727598566 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.476063829787 0.524837075471 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 579.6 618.680645161 94% => 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: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.51792114695 171% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.94265232975 61% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.967874692 48.9658058833 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.6 100.406767564 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.8 20.6045352989 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.6 5.45110844103 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.85842293907 52% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.88709677419 143% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.240293539849 0.236089414692 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.081351478743 0.076458572812 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0667253696356 0.0737576698707 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.155075879861 0.150856017488 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0330578067063 0.0645574589148 51% => OK
automated_readability_index: 11.9 11.7677419355 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 58.1214874552 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 10.1575268817 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 10.9000537634 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.06 8.01818996416 101% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 86.8835125448 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.002688172 90% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
We are expecting: No. of Words: 350 while No. of Different Words: 200
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: 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.