Whether formal writing examination is a good way to assess students learning?
There has long been much contention about the evolution of teaching methods, its effectiveness and growing emphasis on methods to class="assess">assess a learner’s performance. I partly agree with the statement as the class="formal">formal class="written">written examination class="is">is an effective way to class="test">test what students class="have">have learned in class but this method has flaws too which I will further explain in this essay. Throughout the world, the examination class="is">is an official sanction, indispensable method to force the learners to put in more effort, to stay motivated and strive for more energetic attempt to achieve the goal. In our contemporary school systems, class="formal">formal class="written">written examinations are organized at fixed intervals (quarterly, semi-annual or annual) to class="assess">assess the level of knowledge in students and in the case of failure, they are made to repeat the class. Through this conventional method, students are subjected to tests of control of the knowledge taught.
Through class="formal">formal class="written">written examinations, educators get a view of children who require informed assistance. In particular, the early diagnosis of deviation in student’s attributes and pedagogical methods of teaching makes it possible to identify and address the weaknesses before they become irremediable. having said that, the class="formal">formal class="written">written examination cannot gauge one’s level comprehensively. Often in such exams, the mere cramming of subjects class="is">is enough to score good grades which I think class="is">is not an effective method to class="assess">assess a learner’s ability and skills. The educators should think of other qualitative assessments tools and performance evaluation methods like oral presentation, group discussion etc. to class="assess">assess both learning outcome and quality of learning process.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 352, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Having
...nesses before they become irremediable. having said that, the class='formal'...
^^^^^^
Line 2, column 954, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to process'
Suggestion: to process
...earning outcome and quality of learning process.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, i think, in particular
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.5418719212 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 6.10837438424 49% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 8.36945812808 119% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 5.94088669951 67% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 12.0 20.9802955665 57% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 31.9359605911 132% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 5.75862068966 226% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1871.0 1207.87684729 155% => OK
No of words: 260.0 242.827586207 107% => OK
Chars per words: 7.19615384615 5.00649968141 144% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01553427287 3.92707691288 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 6.8075782259 2.71678728327 251% => Word_Length_SD is high.
Unique words: 165.0 139.433497537 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.634615384615 0.580463131201 109% => OK
syllable_count: 550.8 379.143842365 145% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 2.1 1.57093596059 134% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.6157635468 65% => OK
Article: 5.0 1.56157635468 320% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 0.0 1.71428571429 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.931034482759 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 3.65517241379 192% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.5024630542 112% => OK
Sentence length SD: 73.6278334004 50.4703680194 146% => OK
Chars per sentence: 170.090909091 104.977214359 162% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6363636364 20.9669160288 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.81818181818 7.25397266985 39% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 2.0 4.12807881773 48% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.33497536946 37% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 6.9802955665 72% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => OK
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: 0.122022479625 0.242375264174 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0714252855208 0.0925447433944 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0452643058723 0.071462118173 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113292261128 0.151781067708 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.00467742401747 0.0609392437508 8% => 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: 24.3 12.6369458128 192% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 5.83 53.1260098522 11% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 18.2 10.9458128079 166% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 24.78 11.5310837438 215% => Coleman_liau_index is high.
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.7 8.32886699507 116% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 55.0591133005 147% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 17.0 9.94827586207 171% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.3980295567 108% => OK
text_standard: 25.0 10.5123152709 238% => The average readability is very high. Good job!
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 55.5555555556 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 50.0 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.