Whether experimental learning can work well in formal education, agree or disagree or experience is a more effective way to teach compared to books, agree or disagree?
Extensive research has been carried out to improve students learning outcomes. While some people prefer the traditional method of using textbooks in teaching, there are more and more people believe that experiential learning is a better teaching technique. This essay will discuss why experiential learning is a more effective teaching technique comparing to the traditional teaching strategy.
The impact of the experiential learning remains a controversy topic. Such learning technique helps students’ learn the basic concepts and develop other soft skills to solve problems. While involving in a group project, students enhance their ability to work as a team and communication skills. Furthermore, such project requires students to gather information, analyse them and derive a critical solution to the given problem. Such skills and abilities cannot be developed just by reading textbooks and going to lectures. Therefore, practical learning activities should be added to the course syllabus.
It is human nature that we remember things longer through practical experience. It is highly recommended that education institutions should adopt the experiential learning technique to improve students’ performance. A common mind trick to memorise multiple items is creating a story to link all objects into the story. Similarly, practical experience gives students a context in which knowledge consists of a series of relating information; and therefore, such learning technique enhance students’ long term memory.
To conclude, this essay argues that learning through practical experience can benefit students in several ways such as building their soft skills and improve their memory. In my opinion, learning through experience is a potential teaching technique in formal education.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, similarly, so, therefore, while, such as, in my opinion
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 : 8.0 8.36945812808 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 5.94088669951 84% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 20.9802955665 67% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 31.9359605911 88% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 5.75862068966 208% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1542.0 1207.87684729 128% => OK
No of words: 262.0 242.827586207 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.88549618321 5.00649968141 118% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02323427807 3.92707691288 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05612476959 2.71678728327 112% => OK
Unique words: 152.0 139.433497537 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.580152671756 0.580463131201 100% => OK
syllable_count: 467.1 379.143842365 123% => 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: 2.0 1.56157635468 128% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.71428571429 117% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.931034482759 107% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 3.65517241379 55% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 12.6551724138 119% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.5024630542 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.7932411066 50.4703680194 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.8 104.977214359 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.4666666667 20.9669160288 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.53333333333 7.25397266985 62% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
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: 5.0 2.91625615764 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.162516909923 0.242375264174 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0577210826798 0.0925447433944 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0615801639025 0.071462118173 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111669184469 0.151781067708 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0644560121845 0.0609392437508 106% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 12.6369458128 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.3 53.1260098522 70% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.54236453202 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.9458128079 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.59 11.5310837438 144% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.78 8.32886699507 117% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 55.0591133005 160% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.94827586207 90% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.3980295567 85% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.5123152709 86% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 77.7777777778 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 70.0 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.