Some high school teachers (teachers of students ages 14-18) spend most of class time lecturing (speaking) while the students listen and take notes. Other high school teachers spend most of class time on discussion and projects that students are highly involved in and exchange their ideas. Which of these two approaches do you think is more effective for student learning and why?
What kind of approach is more effective for high school students' learning arouses a heated debate among teachers. Some teachers think that spending more time lecturing is a better approach, while others believe that allowing students to discuss and exchange ideas actively in class is a more favorable solution. Personally, I believe that the second method is a more effective way for students to learn. My reasons are as follows.
To begin with, to accelerate high school students' learning effectiveness, students must be extremely attentive during the class, and apparently, encouraging students to discuss, debate, and exchange ideas helps students become attentive. For instance, my high school math teacher allowed us to propose different solutions to the same math problem. To be more specific, if the teacher gave us an algebra question, some of my classmates might use a geometric approach to tackle the problem, while other gifted students may use college calculus or even linear algebra to solve it. Regardless, students became extremely attentive in the class because they always wanted to come up with more concise yet insightful solutions. In other words, active thinking and idea exchanging stimulated high school students to concentrate and think more. On the other hand, if my high school teacher only let us stare at the blackboard and copy equations to our notebooks mechanically, students would undoubtedly space out easily and become inattentive. Evidently, promoting class discussion improves students' learning productivity.
In addition, encouraging students to do projects and exchange ideas is an ideal way for high school students to enhance efficiency. This is because high school students have a lot of subjects to study, and letting them discuss projects helps students become exceptionally efficient and effective in their studies. As an example, when I have some doubts about certain topics, I usually raise the question and ask my teachers directly in class. This way, I can usually have my questions answered in less than 5 minutes. Also, my high school history teacher once asked us to do a small project on aboriginal Taiwanese, and whenever I got confused about different aboriginal cultures or languages, my teammates could correct me instantly. Consequently, I only spent a little time studying this subject because I already acquired abundant historical knowledge by directly interacting with my lecturer and classmates. Contrarily, my brother's high school history teacher only required students to concentrate fully during the lecture. However, whenever my brother had some questions, he did not have the opportunity to discuss them with others, so he could only search for the answer online or in textbooks, and this usually took him more than one hour to do so. As a result, his study efficiency was terrible, and he was constantly overwhelmed by his schoolwork.
In conclusion, I maintain that the second approach is a better way to enhance students' learning effectiveness due to the aforementioned reasons. That is not to say, however, that spending more time speaking is not a good way. Nevertheless, I still believe that my reasons are more persuasive and reasonable.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, consequently, however, if, may, nevertheless, second, so, still, while, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, kind of, as a result, in other words, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 15.1003584229 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 9.8082437276 71% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 13.8261648746 145% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.0286738351 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 49.0 43.0788530466 114% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 52.1666666667 98% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.0752688172 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2715.0 1977.66487455 137% => OK
No of words: 507.0 407.700716846 124% => OK
Chars per words: 5.3550295858 4.8611393121 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.74517233601 4.48103885553 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94000877541 2.67179642975 110% => OK
Unique words: 262.0 212.727598566 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.516765285996 0.524837075471 98% => OK
syllable_count: 850.5 618.680645161 137% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 17.0 9.59856630824 177% => OK
Article: 0.0 3.08781362007 0% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 3.51792114695 227% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 6.0 1.86738351254 321% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.6003584229 112% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.3818832847 48.9658058833 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.043478261 100.406767564 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0434782609 20.6045352989 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.78260869565 5.45110844103 161% => 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 : 7.0 3.85842293907 181% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.397120077562 0.236089414692 168% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.122828263528 0.076458572812 161% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0894007957087 0.0737576698707 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.248001193038 0.150856017488 164% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.094382206865 0.0645574589148 146% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 11.7677419355 126% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 58.1214874552 70% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 10.1575268817 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 10.9000537634 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.75 8.01818996416 109% => OK
difficult_words: 129.0 86.8835125448 148% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.002688172 115% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => 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: 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.