When giving feedbacks to students, some teachers would like to talk to their students
in person, while some teachers would give written comments to students. Which do
you prefer and why ?
From a general view, in the current state of affairs we observe, it is conspicuously clear that teaching communication’s strategies have played a significant and inevitable role in the world of education and science. In this regard, the vast majority of people are of the opinion that without face-to-face connections teachers cannot give efficient comments to students since some concepts needed to be clarified directly in order to have the expected impact. Some others, nevertheless, take an opposite point and hold the view that giving written comments is a more efficient method since sometimes students lose their confidence by receiving direct and face-to-face comments about their mistakes. As far as I am concerned, the advantages of direct communication outweigh those of written one, so I am personally inclined to prefer the direct communication. I cling to this perspective for two main reasons which I will explore in the following paragraphs.
One of the reasons coming to mind at first is that direct communications help teachers to know students better and give more advantageous advice to them. To be more specific, when the only way of conveying between teachers and students is a written comment, teachers do not know why students make a mistake, so they cannot accurately acknowledge students who are truly talented. An example of my own drives this fact home. I remember when I was a senior student at the university, I taught some math courses in my previous school. Since the number of students was genuinely high in my class, I did not have adequate time to check all of them exclusively and talk to them directly about their assignments. As a result, one of my students who was literally genius got a low score in my course just because I did not know her sufficiently, and she had not done her homework well for being sick. Had I had enough time to give direct comments to my students, she would not have got a low score in her exam. This story clearly illustrates that direct connections give rise to knowing students better and expressing more effective recommendations.
Another equally noteworthy point in corroborating my stance is that by communicating face-to-face to give efficient comments, teachers can have a more positive influence on students. Owing to this fact, when teachers talk to students directly, induce them to study better and, as a result, get higher scores. My own experience is a compelling example of this. When I was a high school student, I got an immensely low score in one of my courses since I had had a surgery the week before the exam. Then my professor beckoned me and asked me about the reason of this score. Consequently, I explained my situation to him and promised to get a better score in my final exam. His reaction really impressed me and made me study harder in order to get a genuine better score in my next exam. Hence, this example enlightened me that if professors convey face-to-face with their students, they will have more impact on them.
To put it in a nutshell, by taking into account the aforementioned reasons and examples, I firmly believe that giving direct comments by teachers to students is a more lucrative way. I feel this way because not only can teachers know the specific student better and give the more beneficial advice, but also they can have more influence on students by talking to them directly. It is highly recommended that a survey will be conducted in order to assess what other profound impacts it may have on students’ morale.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-10-27 | pershin_sh | 87 | view |
Comments
To be more precise, teachers…
To be more precise, teachers cannot effectively recognize pupils who are actually talented when their only means of communication with them is through written comments. quordle As a result, teachers do not know why students make mistakes. waffle game
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, hence, if, may, nevertheless, really, so, then, well, i feel, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 15.1003584229 119% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 9.8082437276 102% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 13.8261648746 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.0286738351 145% => OK
Pronoun: 78.0 43.0788530466 181% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 85.0 52.1666666667 163% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.0752688172 149% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2953.0 1977.66487455 149% => OK
No of words: 600.0 407.700716846 147% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.92166666667 4.8611393121 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.94923200384 4.48103885553 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9812744292 2.67179642975 112% => OK
Unique words: 281.0 212.727598566 132% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.468333333333 0.524837075471 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 945.0 618.680645161 153% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 16.0 9.59856630824 167% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.51792114695 199% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.94265232975 162% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.6003584229 117% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.1344086022 124% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 54.5168010546 48.9658058833 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.041666667 100.406767564 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.0 20.6045352989 121% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.375 5.45110844103 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 11.8709677419 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.198401380394 0.236089414692 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0589528031746 0.076458572812 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.054955293856 0.0737576698707 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.129257568469 0.150856017488 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0349716991073 0.0645574589148 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 11.7677419355 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 58.1214874552 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 10.1575268817 128% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 10.9000537634 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.38 8.01818996416 105% => OK
difficult_words: 133.0 86.8835125448 153% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 20.0 10.002688172 200% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.0537634409 119% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
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: 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.