Experience is a more effective way to teach, compared to books? Agree or disagree.
Recently, the phenomenon of Experience is a more effective way to teach, compared to books 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 Experience is a more effective way to teach can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a general standpoint, Experience is a more effective way to teach, compared to books can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that crucial issues, as well as ultimate outcomes, are
inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university
student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered current policies. Thus,
beneficial ramifications of both this common phenomenon and accordingly complicated
procedures apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of a public arena, comparing to books, experience is a more effective way to teach might increase the consequences of critical
needs. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious
university has asserted that the downside of creative processes is correlated negatively
with vital issues. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of this
remarkable phenomenon.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly
believe that the benefits of comparing to effective way to teach books and experience 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.
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 : 14.0 10.5418719212 133% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 6.10837438424 82% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 20.9802955665 91% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 31.9359605911 110% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.75862068966 139% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1536.0 1207.87684729 127% => OK
No of words: 273.0 242.827586207 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.62637362637 5.00649968141 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06481385082 3.92707691288 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.2738811181 2.71678728327 121% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 139.433497537 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.600732600733 0.580463131201 103% => OK
syllable_count: 495.9 379.143842365 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
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: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.5024630542 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.790089221 50.4703680194 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 139.636363636 104.977214359 133% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.8181818182 20.9669160288 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.54545454545 7.25397266985 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 15.0 4.12807881773 363% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => 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: 1.0 2.91625615764 34% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.410665808635 0.242375264174 169% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.156702945706 0.0925447433944 169% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.167840567138 0.071462118173 235% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0999657744002 0.151781067708 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.157914222858 0.0609392437508 259% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.5 12.6369458128 138% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.2 53.1260098522 57% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 10.9458128079 137% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.67 11.5310837438 136% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.44 8.32886699507 125% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 55.0591133005 176% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.94827586207 146% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.3980295567 112% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.5123152709 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum five paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 84.4444444444 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.0 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.