Whether experimental learning can work well in formal education compared to books? 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 educational achievement is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that academic qualification 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 merits of well-rounded education, as well as conventional education, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered vocational education. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both learner's performance and educational facilities apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of science, learning environment might increase the consequences of the theoretical knowledge.Moreover, fundamental aspects of practical learning could relate to this reality that the demerits of intellectual development pertain to training courses. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of learning disorder correlate negatively with learning process. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of a practical experiment.
To end, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of informal learning far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of a laboratory experiment prove the significance of a scientific experiment, but also pinpoint educational perspective implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 405, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'learners'' or 'learner's'?
Suggestion: learners'; learner's
... Thus, beneficial ramifications of both learners performance and educational facilities ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 112, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Moreover
...nsequences of the theoretical knowledge.Moreover, fundamental aspects of practical lear...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 133, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...oretical knowledge.Moreover, fundamental aspects of practical learning could rela...
^^
Line 5, column 399, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to disorder'
Suggestion: to disorder
... asserted that the downside of learning disorder correlate negatively with learning pro...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 407, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d that the downside of learning disorder correlate negatively with learning proce...
^^
Line 5, column 444, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to process'
Suggestion: to process
...der correlate negatively with learning process. Hence, it is correct to presume the pr...
^^^^^^^
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 : 9.0 10.5418719212 85% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => 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: 31.0 31.9359605911 97% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 5.75862068966 278% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1510.0 1207.87684729 125% => OK
No of words: 250.0 242.827586207 103% => OK
Chars per words: 6.04 5.00649968141 121% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.97635364384 3.92707691288 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.55636668526 2.71678728327 131% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 139.433497537 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.66 0.580463131201 114% => 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: 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: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.5024630542 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.4865395904 50.4703680194 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.272727273 104.977214359 131% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.7272727273 20.9669160288 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 7.25397266985 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.33497536946 112% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 6.9802955665 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.210987241042 0.242375264174 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0675106319299 0.0925447433944 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0399176945278 0.071462118173 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.108691314117 0.151781067708 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0199126754772 0.0609392437508 33% => 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: 18.4 12.6369458128 146% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 23.77 53.1260098522 45% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 14.6 6.54236453202 223% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 10.9458128079 141% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 18.05 11.5310837438 157% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.3 8.32886699507 136% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 55.0591133005 189% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 9.94827586207 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.3980295567 104% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.5123152709 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.5 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.