experience is more effective way to teach, compared to books.
In this day and age, the phenomenon of experimental teaching and its corresponding effect has sparked heated controversy. Although contested by many that the matter of experienced people is highly profitable, such an issue is regarded both constructive and positive thoroughly by a considerable number of individuals. I am inclined to conceive that sophisticated experts can be a good point, and I will analyze it throughout this essay.
Initially, from a social viewpoint, educational books can supply the society with some conspicuous impacts which are rooted in the fact that practical education, as well as academic schooling, are integrally bound up. According to my own experience when I was a university student, I carried out an academic experiment that detected no efficient sciences. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both theoretical teaching and costly experiences apparently can be seen.
Secondly, within the realm of science, educational experiences might escalate the consequences of cost-effective methods. Furthermore, fundamental facets of e-books could correlate with this reality that the demerits of efficient education are associated with being well-informed. To shed light on this point, some scientific research undertaken by an elite university has asserted that the downside of professional specialists is negatively related to less experienced teachers. Hence, it is true to assume the preconceived notion of influential courses.
To make a long story short, while there are several convincing arguments on both sides, I deeply believe that the benefits of academic education outnumber its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of efficient publications prove the magnitude of highly-cultured students, but also pinpoint vocational courses implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 402, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ersity has asserted that the downside of professional specialists is negatively r...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, furthermore, hence, if, second, secondly, so, thus, well, while, as well as, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.5418719212 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 20.9802955665 100% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 31.9359605911 106% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.75862068966 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1524.0 1207.87684729 126% => OK
No of words: 261.0 242.827586207 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.83908045977 5.00649968141 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0193898071 3.92707691288 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.42470873767 2.71678728327 126% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 139.433497537 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.67816091954 0.580463131201 117% => OK
syllable_count: 486.0 379.143842365 128% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.57093596059 121% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.71428571429 175% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.65517241379 164% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.5024630542 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.5120009654 50.4703680194 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.0 104.977214359 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.75 20.9669160288 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.16666666667 7.25397266985 126% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 6.9802955665 129% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 2.91625615764 69% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.103931107997 0.242375264174 43% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0391239206561 0.0925447433944 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0557777781801 0.071462118173 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0555288023594 0.151781067708 37% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0384455998369 0.0609392437508 63% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.0 12.6369458128 135% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 24.78 53.1260098522 47% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 10.9458128079 137% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.59 11.5310837438 144% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.91 8.32886699507 131% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 55.0591133005 187% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.0 9.94827586207 161% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.3980295567 100% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.5123152709 162% => 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.