Some people think that a person improves their intellectual skills more when doing group activities. To what extent do you agree?
In recent decades, many researchers have studied the importance of group-level cognition. Indeed, to my mind, there is now convincing evidence that group activities improve the intelligence of individuals. In this essay, I shall examine how research in team-games and study-groups supports this view.
To begin with, team-games clearly require individuals to perform a diverse range of rapid mental calculations. This is because, in a sporting context, players must predict and anticipate possible actions within tight time constraints. For, example, a recent Cambridge study showed that soccer players can - within the span of seconds - calculate over a dozen different permutations that could result from a single soccer related action. Such predictive powers clearly improve players' mental abilities and result from activities performed in a group context.
Secondly, study -groups enable individuals to obtain information that they could not acquire in isolation. This is because peer feedback allows individuals to refine their understanding of concepts and to also learn new information from other members in the study-group. For example, a study by The British Institute for learning found that, if individuals participated in study-groups, they had a far more objective and sophisticated understanding of a topic than learners who were not part of study -groups. Therefore, it is certainly the case that learning in a group improves an individual's mental abilities.
In conclusion, I strongly agree with the notion that group activities improve intellectual abilities. In the future, we will certainly see schools take greater measures to ensure that more group-level cognition in the classroom.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-30 | Diksha Bharti | 67 | view |
| 2019-09-17 | Haihau | 67 | view |
| 2019-09-09 | Mahmud Mahmudlu | 67 | view |
| 2019-09-09 | Mahmud Mahmudlu | 67 | view |
| 2019-07-10 | krunalptl29 | 61 | view |
- The graph shows the pollution levels in London between 1600 and 2000. 73
- Some people think that developed countries have higher responsibility to combat climate change than developing countries. others believe that all countries should have the same responsibilities towards protecting the environment. Discuss both these views 73
- Some people think that a person improves their intellectual skills more when doing group activities. To what extent do you agree? 61
- Walking is known to be beneficial for health and yet fewer and fewer people are walking these days What are the reasons for this What can be done to tackle this problem 75
- Some people think that developed countries have higher responsibility to combat climate change than developing countries. others believe that all countries should have the same responsibilities towards protecting the environment. Discuss both these views 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 330, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to find', 'to found'
Suggestion: to find; to found
...y by The British Institute for learning found that, if individuals participated in st...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 580, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'an individual' or simply 'individuals'?
Suggestion: an individual; individuals
... case that learning in a group improves an individuals mental abilities. In conclusion, I str...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, for example, in conclusion, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 13.1623246493 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 41.998997996 83% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1451.0 1615.20841683 90% => OK
No of words: 254.0 315.596192385 80% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.7125984252 5.12529762239 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.99216450694 4.20363070211 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.15526119644 2.80592935109 112% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 176.041082164 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.629921259843 0.561755894193 112% => OK
syllable_count: 443.7 506.74238477 88% => 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: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.7530406545 49.4020404114 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.615384615 106.682146367 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5384615385 20.7667163134 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.46153846154 7.06120827912 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.111128176123 0.244688304435 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0478127333934 0.084324248473 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0437392902576 0.0667982634062 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0786139004011 0.151304729494 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0457501610362 0.056905535591 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 13.0946893788 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 50.2224549098 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.84 12.4159519038 128% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.86 8.58950901804 115% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 78.4519038076 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
More content wanted.
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.