Do you agree or disagree? Asking children to work in small groups is the best way to teach young children.
The most efficient ways with which humans can enhance the learning process have always been a matter of attention. Throughout history, so many people have theorized about that. When it comes to children, it will be more vital since it is believed nowadays that learning is faster and more constant in the early stages of adaptations of human beings: childhood. In this line of thought, whether or not learning is at its highest efficiency when children are required to work within smaller groups is the topic of this essay. The writer is not in favor of this argument.
No one can deny the fact that group work requires young children to cooperate, and out of cooperation comes learning. When children try to memorize a poem with their peers, all the joy and fun of doing this task with their friends is the fact that helps them do that in a more feasible way. However, there is a myriad of problems associated with this approach.
First, when assigned to work within smaller groups, young children are inclined to rely on other diligent members of the group. It was tested in numerous experiments that since people are not held accountable individually in group work, they tend to not put in their best effort. Needless to say, learning happens when juveniles practice some activities. In this way, when they don’t do something meaningful and only rely on other group members' performance, it is fair to say that they can’t learn anything at all.
Second, it is an arduous job to control young children when they are aggravated in a room. This is because they tend to make a lot of noises, or nag about the other person’s color of shirt, or do something as basic and rudiment as crying because of being hungry. This chaotic situation makes controlling young children’s gatherings so hard to control. If those in charge of teaching them cannot control the situation, children are not able to learn anything at all since all of these things may bring about distraction. I don’t think there’s any person out there who doesn’t believe that distraction can get in the way of learning.
So, what do I think is the most feasible way of teaching children? It was long thought that children are keener than old people. In fact, there are a lot of moments when you see a child watching TV while his or her mother is talking on the phone. The next day you see that kid imitating the way his or her mother was talking on the phone. In other words, children are passive learners. They don’t need to be constantly focused on a matter to learn everything about it. All they need is just the presence: that they are in places where something worth learning is happening.
To conclude, I think placing juveniles in places where they can passively grasp the concepts we want to teach them is the most effective way to teach them new materials.
Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
---|---|---|---|
2023-06-30 | AJ720 | 88 | view |
2022-12-30 | Alfaromeo | 73 | view |
2020-03-17 | syuku | 62 | view |
2020-03-17 | zhaodejian | 76 | view |
2019-02-20 | Orange Dots | 73 | view |
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement A job with more vacation time but a low salary is better than a job with a high salary but less vacation time 70
- hgh 3
- Some people think that success is most important in their life Others think that it s more important to be happy when they fail Which idea do you agree with and why 70
- Do you agree or disagree Asking children to work in small groups is the best way to teach young children 73
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement A job with more vacation time but a low salary is better than a job with a high salary but less vacation time 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 387, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...gs: childhood. In this line of thought, whether or not learning is at its highest efficiency w...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 437, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'members'' or 'member's'?
Suggestion: members'; member's
...meaningful and only rely on other group members performance, it is fair to say that the...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, may, second, so, while, i think, in fact, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 31.0 15.1003584229 205% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 9.8082437276 102% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 13.8261648746 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 23.0 11.0286738351 209% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 56.0 43.0788530466 130% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 74.0 52.1666666667 142% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.0752688172 136% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2350.0 1977.66487455 119% => OK
No of words: 499.0 407.700716846 122% => OK
Chars per words: 4.70941883768 4.8611393121 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.72634191566 4.48103885553 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52347821418 2.67179642975 94% => OK
Unique words: 250.0 212.727598566 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.501002004008 0.524837075471 95% => OK
syllable_count: 689.4 618.680645161 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.51630824373 92% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 9.59856630824 115% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.6003584229 121% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.5450295671 48.9658058833 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.0 100.406767564 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.96 20.6045352989 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.04 5.45110844103 56% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.53405017921 132% => 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 : 8.0 3.85842293907 207% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.88709677419 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.282234498567 0.236089414692 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0807401868302 0.076458572812 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0704556847766 0.0737576698707 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.150175799162 0.150856017488 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0434883101973 0.0645574589148 67% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.7 11.7677419355 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 69.11 58.1214874552 119% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.3 10.1575268817 82% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.04 10.9000537634 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.77 8.01818996416 97% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 86.8835125448 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.002688172 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => 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.