Experience is a more effective way to teach, compared to books? Agree or disagree.
Recently, the phenomenon of adding practical lessons in academic curriculum and its corresponding impacts has sparked a heated debate. Although this issue is beneficail as it regarded by the substantial number of individuals both constructive and positive, others hold opponent views. I am inclined to believe that the courses which are based on experiments besides the theories can be plus as they could develop some brilliant aspects for their adherents.
From a social standpoint, replacing experimental courses instead of theoretical ones in formal education can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the modern education. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic survey which discovered these merits. Firstly, the pupils who have these lessons reach higher productivity and efficiency due to facing more details and observing the outcomes. Furthermore, this type of education enhance some paramount aspects including teamwork and intellectual skills. Moreover, due to these courses are less boring than the theoretical ones, students are so motivated to attend them.
On the other hand, there is no doubt omitting the theoretical courses and encouraging pupils to participate the practical ones has some opponents. They asserted that pupils have less concentration in the practical courses. Also, as a tangible example, some research undertaken by a prestigious university demonstrated that theoretical lessons have the higher ability to educate the defenitions which are vital in studying.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the merits of utilizing the practical courses in formal educational systems far more outweigh its demerits.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 10, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
Recently, the phenomenon of adding practical lesso...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, first, firstly, furthermore, moreover, so, while, no doubt, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 6.10837438424 49% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 20.9802955665 100% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 31.9359605911 85% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.75862068966 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1527.0 1207.87684729 126% => OK
No of words: 267.0 242.827586207 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.7191011236 5.00649968141 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.04229324003 3.92707691288 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05464178824 2.71678728327 112% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 139.433497537 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.621722846442 0.580463131201 107% => OK
syllable_count: 488.7 379.143842365 129% => 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: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.931034482759 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.5024630542 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.4175704883 50.4703680194 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.25 104.977214359 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.25 20.9669160288 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.66666666667 7.25397266985 106% => 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 : 0.0 2.75862068966 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 2.91625615764 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0404063820569 0.242375264174 17% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0131808531361 0.0925447433944 14% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0187029983616 0.071462118173 26% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0248000519879 0.151781067708 16% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0151854408686 0.0609392437508 25% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 12.6369458128 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 53.1260098522 61% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 10.9458128079 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.19 11.5310837438 140% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.76 8.32886699507 129% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 55.0591133005 185% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 9.94827586207 156% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.3980295567 104% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.5123152709 105% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 11.1111111111 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 10.0 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.