Whether experimental learning can work well in formal education, agree or disagree?
Recently, the phenomenon of experimental learning and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of quick learners is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that teaching students can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, formal education can provide the society with some noticeable effects, which are rooted in the fact that practical learning, as well as good teachers, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student I performed an academic experiment which discovered clever students. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both private education and learning standpoint apparently can be seen.
Within the realm off science, old methods of teaching might increase the consequences of the importance of teaching. Moreover, fundamental aspects of the role of old education relate to this reality that the demerits of experienced teachers pertain to being efficient. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of educating efficiently is correlated negatively with experimental methods. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of teaching experience.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that practical teaching far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of clever students prove the significance of kind teachers, but also pinpoint the role of teachers implications.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, hence, if, moreover, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.5418719212 104% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 6.10837438424 82% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 31.9359605911 103% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.75862068966 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1436.0 1207.87684729 119% => OK
No of words: 251.0 242.827586207 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.72111553785 5.00649968141 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98032404683 3.92707691288 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.25792656312 2.71678728327 120% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 139.433497537 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.653386454183 0.580463131201 113% => OK
syllable_count: 450.0 379.143842365 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.6157635468 65% => 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: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.5024630542 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.5629101937 50.4703680194 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.666666667 104.977214359 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9166666667 20.9669160288 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.41666666667 7.25397266985 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 6.9802955665 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => 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: 0.106151207887 0.242375264174 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.034415740894 0.0925447433944 37% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0457419807785 0.071462118173 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0561271247489 0.151781067708 37% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0477013697422 0.0609392437508 78% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 12.6369458128 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.26 53.1260098522 64% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.5 10.9458128079 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.9 11.5310837438 138% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.79 8.32886699507 130% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 55.0591133005 178% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.94827586207 116% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.3980295567 96% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.5123152709 114% => 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.