some people argue that teaching children of different abilities together benefits all of them. Others believe that intelligent children should be taught separately and given special treatment. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Nowadays, many hold the view that children of various abilities should be taught together. However, there is a body of opinion which claims that schools should provide special treatments to intelligent children. In this essay, I will examine both sides of the debate and give my opinion.
To begin with, it is undeniable that indiscriminate education can improve low-scoring students’ academic performance. This is because they can be encouraged by other high leveled peers, becoming more industrious. In addition, students with better attainments would foster altruism as they would realize the importance of help others. For example, teachers usually ask intelligent students help their classmates who have trouble in study. Once a child has experienced the sense of achievement after giving assistant to low-scoring students, he is more likely to help others in the future.
On the other hand, nonetheless, intelligent students will acquire more knowledge from special trainings for them. Compared with normal students, their courses contain more exercises and complex knowledge, having more benefits to enlarge children’s horizon and improve their abilities. Furthermore, normal students will face less pressure if they have classes without intelligent ones. They do not need to finish assignments beyond their abilities which are generally prepared for smart students. Thus, different children can obtain different teaching methods suit for them, which improves the efficiency of education.
To summarize, there is no doubt that indiscriminate teaching will help shorten the gap between students. At the same time, nevertheless, classified teaching would be more suitable for various groups. In the final analysis, I think schools should have freedom to choose teaching methods based on their situations.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-12-25 | Frank Chen | 67 | view |
| 2018-12-25 | Frank Chen | 69 | view |
| 2018-01-11 | bella123 | 56 | view |
| 2017-01-23 | math | 91 | view |
| 2017-01-18 | lucasle | 84 | view |
- The three pie charts below show the changes in annual spending by a particular UK school in 1981, 1991 and 2001. 67
- The three pie charts below show the changes in annual spending by a particular UK school in 1981, 1991 and 2001. 73
- The three pie charts below show the changes in annual spending by a particular UK school in 1981, 1991 and 2001. 67
- The three pie charts below show the changes in annual spending by a particular UK school in 1981, 1991 and 2001. 73
- The pie charts below show units of electricity production by fuel source in Australia and France in 1980 and 2000. 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 11, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun hold seems to be countable; consider using: 'many holds'.
Suggestion: many holds
Nowadays, many hold the view that children of various abili...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 270, Rule ID: AFFORD_VBG[1]
Message: This verb is used with infinitive: 'to teach'.
Suggestion: to teach
...k schools should have freedom to choose teaching methods based on their situations.
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, however, if, nevertheless, nonetheless, thus, for example, i think, in addition, no doubt, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 7.85571142285 178% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 10.4138276553 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 24.0651302605 91% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 41.998997996 76% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1561.0 1615.20841683 97% => OK
No of words: 270.0 315.596192385 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.78148148148 5.12529762239 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.05360046442 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94848546367 2.80592935109 105% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 176.041082164 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.640740740741 0.561755894193 114% => OK
syllable_count: 464.4 506.74238477 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.2975951904 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 22.9971975195 49.4020404114 47% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 97.5625 106.682146367 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.875 20.7667163134 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.5 7.06120827912 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.222920559804 0.244688304435 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0750617806742 0.084324248473 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0722015848042 0.0667982634062 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.150174519557 0.151304729494 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.110330674089 0.056905535591 194% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 13.0946893788 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.78 50.2224549098 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.95 12.4159519038 128% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.34 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 78.4519038076 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 9.78957915832 77% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.1190380762 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.