Technology is becoming increasingly prevalent in the world today. Given time, technology will completely replace the teacher in the classroom. Do you agree or disagree with this statement?
In today’s world, the use of technology is ever-increasing. Even in classrooms technology can be commonly seen. It is disagreed that technology will completely replace the teacher in the classroom. Analyzing both the inability of a technology-driven teacher to discipline students in a classroom as well as this robotic teacher’s hindrance to a student’s learning process will show this.
Firstly, a teacher powered by artificial intelligence would have little to no control over its students. For example, it is commonly understood that children require the watchful eye of a teacher to ensure that they are indeed completing their class work and not fooling around during class time. Unfortunately, this is something that a robotic teacher simply cannot provide. Thus this makes it clear why technology will never completely replace the teacher in the classroom.
Secondly, a robotic teacher would disrupt a student’s learning process and in effect slow a student’s ability to absorb information from lessons. For instance, kids require motivation to be taught effectively. Such is a quality human teachers possess but the technologically driven instructor does not. From this, it becomes quite evident that robotic instructors will never take the place of real teachers in a classroom.
In summary, a robotic teacher lacks the discipline needed to instruct students properly and actually operates to retard a student’s ability to learn new information. Thus it is clear why the idea of having a class run entirely by a machine cannot be supported. After analyzing this subject, it is predicted that the negative aspects of the debate over computerized teaching will forever be stronger than the positive ones and because of this computers will never replace teachers.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-05-31 | Mehdi.Babaie | 77 | view |
- Scientists agree that people ruin their health by eating junk food Some people think that the best way to prevent people from eating junk food is to educate them while others believe that this won t work Discuss both views and give your own opinion 69
- The trend of increased consumer goods production is damaging the natural environment. Why is it still happening? What are the solutions for this situation? 78
- Music should not be taught in schools. Instead, other subjects such as compurers and science should be taught. Do you agree or disagree with this statement? 56
- Some people say we have too many choices these days? Do you agree or disagree? 61
- Parents are responsible for the behavior of the children To what extent do you agree or disagree 63
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 302, Rule ID: BOTH_AS_WELL_AS[1]
Message: Probable usage error. Use 'and' after 'both'.
Suggestion: and
...r to discipline students in a classroom as well as this robotic teacher's hindrance t...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 377, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
... robotic teacher simply cannot provide. Thus this makes it clear why technology will...
^^^^
Line 5, column 245, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'teacher'?
Suggestion: teacher
...ht effectively. Such is a quality human teachers possess but the technologically driven ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 172, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...pos;s ability to learn new information. Thus it is clear why the idea of having a cl...
^^^^
Line 7, column 444, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...r than the positive ones and because of this computers will never replace teachers.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, firstly, if, second, secondly, so, thus, well, for example, for instance, in summary, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.5418719212 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 6.10837438424 180% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 5.94088669951 101% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 20.9802955665 105% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 31.9359605911 103% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.75862068966 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1533.0 1207.87684729 127% => OK
No of words: 277.0 242.827586207 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.53429602888 5.00649968141 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07962216107 3.92707691288 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.26629623697 2.71678728327 120% => OK
Unique words: 153.0 139.433497537 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.552346570397 0.580463131201 95% => OK
syllable_count: 478.8 379.143842365 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.57093596059 108% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.6157635468 108% => OK
Article: 4.0 1.56157635468 256% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 1.71428571429 58% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.931034482759 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 12.6551724138 119% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.5024630542 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.3333757962 50.4703680194 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.2 104.977214359 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.4666666667 20.9669160288 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.86666666667 7.25397266985 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.33497536946 94% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 6.9802955665 100% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 2.75862068966 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.315375081295 0.242375264174 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.13095833114 0.0925447433944 142% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.13200911876 0.071462118173 185% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.207496598403 0.151781067708 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.112234815187 0.0609392437508 184% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 12.6369458128 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 53.1260098522 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.54236453202 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.9458128079 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.79 11.5310837438 128% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.2 8.32886699507 110% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 55.0591133005 149% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.94827586207 106% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.3980295567 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.5123152709 86% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 77.7777777778 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 70.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.