Does the advent of internet change the role of the teacher? To what extent do you agree?
Recently, the phenomenon of the internet changes the role of the teacher and its corresponding impacts have sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of complex procedures, is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and consequently positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that the influence of the internet can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a general standpoint, the changing teacher role through the internet can provide the society with some noticeable effects, which are rooted in the fact that updated educational programs, as well as upbringing students, are inextricably bound up. From my own experience, when I was a student university, I performed an academic experiment, which discovered current policies. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both this the internet phenomenon and accordingly using online sources apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of a public arena, this unique invention might increase the consequences of critical needs. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted the downside of the available internet is correlated negatively with the wasting time caused by probing unnecessary needs. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notions of this remarkable phenomenon.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of the internet on teachers' role far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of this unique phenomenon prove the significance of total outcomes, but also pinpoint thorny issues' potential implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 132, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'teachers'' or 'teacher's'?
Suggestion: teachers'; teacher's
...ve that the benefits of the internet on teachers role far outweigh its drawbacks. Not on...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 325, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t thorny issues potential implications.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, apparently, but, consequently, hence, if, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 6.10837438424 82% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 5.94088669951 135% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 20.9802955665 91% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 31.9359605911 97% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.75862068966 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1468.0 1207.87684729 122% => OK
No of words: 259.0 242.827586207 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.66795366795 5.00649968141 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01166760082 3.92707691288 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.19591314882 2.71678728327 118% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 139.433497537 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.648648648649 0.580463131201 112% => OK
syllable_count: 469.8 379.143842365 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.6157635468 108% => OK
Article: 2.0 1.56157635468 128% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.5024630542 112% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.9509790209 50.4703680194 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.454545455 104.977214359 127% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5454545455 20.9669160288 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.54545454545 7.25397266985 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.33497536946 37% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 6.9802955665 72% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.161899869049 0.242375264174 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0565483477997 0.0925447433944 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0648085423508 0.071462118173 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0946634152648 0.151781067708 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0418415808115 0.0609392437508 69% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.1 12.6369458128 135% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 53.1260098522 59% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 10.9458128079 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.9 11.5310837438 138% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.06 8.32886699507 133% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 55.0591133005 187% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.94827586207 146% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.3980295567 108% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.5123152709 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.8888888889 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 80.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.