When your professor wants you to learn in a short time, which is better: working in a group or alone?
Learning efficiency, being closely related to knowledge accumulation, has been
valued and even triggers heated discussions over how to enable students to acquire sufficient knowledge within a short time. In order to boost efficiency, students, in some people’s views, should study alone. Contrary to these people’s opinions is my perspective that students, working in a group, can learn more efficiently, due to its contribution to more assistance and fewer errors.
What must be prioritized is that working in a group, rather than / compared with / instead of / not / unlike studying alone, students can help each other and learn efficiently, by providing more knowledge and sharing burdens. To begin with, students, studying in a group, can acquire knowledge. In detail, in a group, students can exchange opinions, experience and solutions / methods, during which they will obtain a large quantity of knowledge; on the other hand / on the contrary / conversely / in contrast / instead, when learning alone, students merely get limited knowledge.
Moreover, students in a group share their burdens. In detail, within a group / when working in a study group / in a team / with teamwork, different students will assume their responsibilities, including searching for information, solving problems and writing reports, and thus study efficiently; a student alone, conversely, have to cope with the whole task.
What should be equally worth discussing is that working in a group, compared with
dealing with tasks alone, can reduce errors and thus help students learn more
efficiently, since others can provide objective and comprehensive information. To
begin with, never can we ignore the fact that members in a group can offer objective
views. To explain it further, within a group, all people will present their opinions,
avoiding the situation where one personal view becomes dominant, and thus an
objective conclusion can be reached quickly; on the other hand, working alone, he
tends to be subjective and make more errors. To explain it further, it is people in a
group that will offer comprehensive information. To be more specific, a wide range of
information, in terms of the problem’s background, solutions and stakeholders, can be accessible, reducing the risks of committing errors; can people working alone access
comprehensive information and locate errors quickly?
Mutual assistance, essential in group work, can be reached, boosting the efficiency of
learning. Errors, avoided in a group, will be reduced, improving learning productivity.
To conclude, only by working in a group can students cope with tasks efficiently.
- People should buy things made in their own country even if the price is higher than the same things made elsewhere 90
- Profession athletes who receive high salaries such as football and basketball player deserve what they get 90
- When your professor wants you to learn in a short time which is better working in a group or alone 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 12, column 46, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... to be subjective and make more errors. To explain it further, it is people in a ...
^^
Line 13, column 50, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...t will offer comprehensive information. To be more specific, a wide range of info...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, if, moreover, so, thus, in contrast, on the contrary, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 15.1003584229 93% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 9.8082437276 214% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 13.0 13.8261648746 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.0286738351 82% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 43.0788530466 39% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 52.1666666667 113% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.0752688172 136% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2255.0 1977.66487455 114% => OK
No of words: 404.0 407.700716846 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.58168316832 4.8611393121 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48327461151 4.48103885553 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07252446265 2.67179642975 115% => OK
Unique words: 205.0 212.727598566 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.507425742574 0.524837075471 97% => OK
syllable_count: 667.8 618.680645161 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 9.59856630824 21% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 19.0 4.94265232975 384% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.6003584229 78% => 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: 25.0 20.1344086022 124% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 89.6339561425 48.9658058833 183% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.9375 100.406767564 140% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.25 20.6045352989 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.4375 5.45110844103 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 18.0 4.53405017921 397% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.88709677419 20% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.175332170249 0.236089414692 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0722551077343 0.076458572812 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0289964888702 0.0737576698707 39% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0593109670627 0.150856017488 39% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0413506081936 0.0645574589148 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.5 11.7677419355 149% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 58.1214874552 65% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 10.1575268817 140% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.38 10.9000537634 141% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.25 8.01818996416 115% => OK
difficult_words: 112.0 86.8835125448 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.002688172 145% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.0537634409 119% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.247311828 146% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.