Technology is becoming progressively universal. In the fullness of time, classroom teachers will be totally substituted for
technology. Do you agree or disagree?
In this present world, the usage of technology is constantly on the rise. Even classrooms are among the many places that enjoy the usage and benefits of technology. It is disagreed that classroom teachers will be totally substituted for technology. Analysing the incapability of disciplining classroom students with technology, as well as the limitation in the learning process of students taught with technology will prove this.
Firstly, a robotic teacher made with artificial intelligence would lack sufficient control over its classroom students. For instance, it is widely known that kids need to be thoroughly watched by their teachers to be sure that they take their class works seriously and do not fool around when classes are going on. Sadly, this is a task robotic teachers will be incapable of carrying out. Therefore, this makes it clear that classroom teachers will never be totally substituted for technology.
Secondly, the learning process of students would be disrupted if they are taught by robotic teachers, which may slow down some students’ ability to comprehend information taught in lessons. For example, kids love to be motivated before lessons are taught effectively. This is a quality that many human teachers have but robotic teachers do not have. Thus this becomes apparent that human teachers will never be replaced with robotic teachers in a classroom.
To summarise, a robotic teacher does not have the necessary disciple to properly give instructions to students and actually works to retard the ability of a student to comprehend new lessons. Therefore, it is clear that the idea of running a classroom completely by a machine cannot be supported. After thorough analysis on this subject, it is predicted that the adverse effects of the debate over technology-driven teaching will always be greater than the positive effects, and because of this, classroom teachers will never be substituted for technology.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-08-28 | toastedhead | 79 | view |
- Your neighbours have recently written to you to complain about the noise from your house flat.Write a letter to your neighbours. In your letter explain the reasons for the noise apologise describe what action you will takeWrite at least 150 words.You do N 73
- Technology is becoming progressively universal In the fullness of time classroom teachers will be totally substituted for technology Do you agree or disagree 79
- The internet has greatly increased our access to information. To what extent do you think this is a good thing?Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. 56
- Some people feel that entertainers (e.g. film stars, pop musicians or sports stars) are paid too much money.Do you agree or disagree?Which other types of jobs should be highly paid?Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your 73
- In some countries, younger people are neglecting their right to vote.What problems does this cause and what are some of the possible solutions? 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 356, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
... have but robotic teachers do not have. Thus this becomes apparent that human teache...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, firstly, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, well, for example, for instance, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 13.1623246493 167% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 24.0651302605 112% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 41.998997996 98% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.3376753507 48% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1649.0 1615.20841683 102% => OK
No of words: 307.0 315.596192385 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37133550489 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18585898806 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96016481471 2.80592935109 105% => OK
Unique words: 157.0 176.041082164 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.511400651466 0.561755894193 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 507.6 506.74238477 100% => 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: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.8879600619 49.4020404114 115% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.933333333 106.682146367 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4666666667 20.7667163134 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.13333333333 7.06120827912 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
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: 0.292097067992 0.244688304435 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.123430075187 0.084324248473 146% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.103568004735 0.0667982634062 155% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.201454671685 0.151304729494 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0266676753111 0.056905535591 47% => 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: 14.1 13.0946893788 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 50.2224549098 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.87 12.4159519038 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.69 8.58950901804 101% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 78.4519038076 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => 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.