It is significantly important to teach children in an efficient way. Parents are more concerned about their kid’s education nowadays and teachers are trying to maximize the learning and efficiency of students. Some people believe that students are doing better when they are working alone on their projects, however, others do not agree with this notion and think that children have better understanding and learning efficiency when they work on a project with other students. I, personally, am of the latter opinion. I will elaborate on why I feel this way in the following paragraphs.
To begin with, teamwork is so important and imperative and we should teach our kids to work together to achieve more effective results. If kids learn to do their works and projects in a group rather than alone, they will be more successful in the future. Moreover, most real world problems and projects requires people to work together and in teams. Hence, we prepare students by giving them group projects, which will impact their future abilities and proficiency. Furthermore, learners will understand that they can divide their tasks and everyone should do some part of the project, which will lead to a better outcome and results. For example, when I was at high school, our teacher gave us a teamwork, which I learned a lot from that project and also it was beneficial for my teamwork. So, children can learn to do their projects alongside others and in teams to achieve better results and learn more effectively.
Last but not least, when students work together, they can socialize and have better relationship with each other. When kids work together in a project, they learn how to interact with another kid and socialize better. Furthermore, they learn from each other and correct their mistakes, which will have a positive impact on their learning process and efficiency. My own story is a good illustration of this. When I was in school and working on a team project, I had the chance to interact with other kids and improve my social relationship and made good friends, which helped me in the next years and throughout my life. Had I not done this team project, I would not have been able to learn how to make friends.
To put it all in a nutshell, taking all the aforementioned reasons into account, I strongly believe that teamwork and group projects will yield better results and kids can learn more effectively in this way, because not only can they learn to work in group and cooperate with each other but also they can socialize and make friends.
- Amtrak is an intercity train service currently owned by the United States government There are a number of critics who believe that the government should not own Amtrak and that Amtrak should be sold to a privately owned company These critics put forward 70
- When teachers assign projects on which students must work together the students learn much more effectively than when they are asked to work alone on projects 70
- At the end of the Triassic period 200 million years ago there was a mass extinction event that caused the extinction of more than half of all living species It was this extinction event that allowed dinosaurs to become the dominant species for the next 14 71
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement The extended family grandparents cousins aunts and uncles is less important now than it was in the past 60
- Private collectors have been selling and buying fossils the petrified remains of ancient organisms ever since the eighteenth century In recent years however the sale of fossils particularly of dinosaurs and other large vertebrates has grown into a big bus 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 49, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an efficient way" with adverb for "efficient"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...gnificantly important to teach children in an efficient way. Parents are more concerned about their...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, hence, however, if, moreover, so, for example, i feel, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 15.1003584229 79% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 9.8082437276 163% => OK
Conjunction : 29.0 13.8261648746 210% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.0286738351 145% => OK
Pronoun: 50.0 43.0788530466 116% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 52.1666666667 107% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 8.0752688172 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2124.0 1977.66487455 107% => OK
No of words: 436.0 407.700716846 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.87155963303 4.8611393121 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56953094068 4.48103885553 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62512800238 2.67179642975 98% => OK
Unique words: 202.0 212.727598566 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.463302752294 0.524837075471 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 632.7 618.680645161 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 9.59856630824 125% => OK
Article: 0.0 3.08781362007 0% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.51792114695 171% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.94265232975 40% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.6003584229 92% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 70.9700104429 48.9658058833 145% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.789473684 100.406767564 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.9473684211 20.6045352989 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.84210526316 5.45110844103 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 11.8709677419 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.85842293907 26% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.37483983835 0.236089414692 159% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.12003127781 0.076458572812 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0862472853888 0.0737576698707 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.246697150974 0.150856017488 164% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0644460120869 0.0645574589148 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 11.7677419355 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 58.1214874552 99% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.1575268817 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.26 10.9000537634 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.34 8.01818996416 92% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 86.8835125448 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.002688172 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.