Professor should prohibit the use of devices that can connect to the internet in class

Surrounded by various Internet-available devices, modern people can hardly imagine the life without Internet. Even elementary students have cellphones in their pockets and backpacks. However, in this statement, the speaker asserts that professors should stop students using these devices in class. From my point of view, not all professors need to ban such tools. It first depends on their personal style and the specific requirements of class.

On the one hand, there are professors requiring their students to bring computers to class. Taking my computer programming class for example, the professor stated on the first day that we had to practice and code on our own computers. After teaching the basic knowledge, the coding part followed can be a quick test. Besides, more and more teachers tend to put their PPTs on the Internet. Students can easily download and take notes on their computers rather than spend time and money printing out. Some updated editions can be quickly downloaded in class, too.

On the other hand, nevertheless, for professors accustomed to interacting with students, these devices can be barriers for them to carry on the discussion. I once counted that I had received messages from Wechat every five minutes on average in a class, not to mention news pushed by other apps. Due to the disturbance of Internet, students may fail to give reactions in time. The inactive atmosphere in class not only influences the students themselves, but also discourages the professors. Chances are that they may not prepare that carefully since then.

Yet for those in support of the ban, another controversial question comes that whether it can improve teaching efficiency. Students can be absent-minded by many ways other than using devices that can connect to the Internet. Never can we put a limit on one’s mind. What’s worse is that some students may not show up in class in this case for reasons like they have important messages to reply. As an adult, a student has the right to do things he attaches more significance to.

Therefore, the key of teaching efficiency is not the exclusion of devices, but the quality of class itself. I have heard many complaints about tedious classes. Sometimes I also feel it a waste of time to listen to the repeat of words on the textbook. In the contrary, every semester there are classes full of students, though a great percentage of them are not enrolled in. If a class is useful and interesting, students will spontaneously stop doing irrelevant things and dive into the ocean of knowledge. Instead of considering about setting a rule, a more practical way is to dig out what students like and what they need.

To sum up, despite different opinions of professors on this statement, I think in no case should the rule be carried out. After all, it can’t be panacea for teaching efficiency and may bring counterproductive effects. More effort should be put on the elevation of class quality.

Votes
Average: 3.5 (2 votes)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, however, if, may, nevertheless, so, then, therefore, after all, for example, i think, to sum up, on the other hand

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 12.4196629213 161% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 41.0 33.0505617978 124% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 81.0 58.6224719101 138% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 12.9106741573 54% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2490.0 2235.4752809 111% => OK
No of words: 494.0 442.535393258 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04048582996 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71445763274 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85052445733 2.79657885939 102% => OK
Unique words: 268.0 215.323595506 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.542510121457 0.4932671777 110% => OK
syllable_count: 761.4 704.065955056 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.38483146067 228% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 30.0 20.2370786517 148% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 23.0359550562 69% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 28.8466443263 60.3974514979 48% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 83.0 118.986275619 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.4666666667 23.4991977007 70% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.7 5.21951772744 90% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.83258426966 228% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.328496027571 0.243740707755 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0778476669588 0.0831039109588 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0783457347406 0.0758088955206 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.17479474362 0.150359130593 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0644195749912 0.0667264976115 97% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.5 14.1392134831 74% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 48.8420337079 130% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 12.1743820225 69% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.66 12.1639044944 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.39 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 124.0 100.480337079 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 11.8971910112 55% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.2143820225 75% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.