Bombarded as we are by the ubiquity of mobile phones, there are good reasons to worry about children and mobile-madness. While smart devices can undoubtedly play a role in security, connectedness, and even learning, many schools have chosen to ban their use on campus. I regard this as a positive step, which can benefit not only academic performance but also physical and social development.
Limited access to phones in the classroom can improve learning. Without the distraction of mobiles, it is easier for teachers and students to concentrate on their class. When students have their smart devices in lap or pocket, for instance, there is an irresistible urge to check regularly for texts, alerts, or social media updates. Furthermore, teens can become fanatical about being "always available" or panic under peer pressure without staying in touch. These distractions can erode attention spans and interfere with the class's quality, which can have long-term effects on academic performance. A blanket ban on phones during class can free learners from this addiction and allow them to focus.
In addition to the ban during class, a school that restricts the use outside the class can also expect improvements in children's wellbeing. Phone addiction can crowd out activities that can improve the young's intellectual skills, such as reading, playing chess, and table games. Here is the same with their physical and social development. Developing physical and mental health, understanding social cues, and creating artworks are all crucial abilities that bear little relationship to screen viewing. Many children end up wearing glasses and obsessing in childhood without strict mobile rules.
In conclusion, I would argue that phone use limitations are necessary for the holistic development of the young, although phones are a mixed blessing for them. With lines and boundaries, students are more likely to learn better, strengthen friendships, and engage in healthier pursuits.
- A longer prison term as a way of punishing those who break the law is not as good as other methods To what extend do you agree or disagree 89
- Some people think it is more beneficial to play sports that are played in teams e g football However some think that it is better to play individual games e g swimming etc Discuss both the views and give your opinion 56
- Some schools have restricted the use of mobile phones 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 221, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to better', 'to well'
Suggestion: to better; to well
...ries, students are more likely to learn better, strengthen friendships, and engage in ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, so, then, well, while, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 10.4138276553 163% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 24.0651302605 71% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1688.0 1615.20841683 105% => OK
No of words: 308.0 315.596192385 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.48051948052 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18926351222 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92790184415 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 176.041082164 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.62987012987 0.561755894193 112% => OK
syllable_count: 506.7 506.74238477 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 0.809619238477 741% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 31.0131020699 49.4020404114 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.5 106.682146367 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.25 20.7667163134 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 7.06120827912 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.197803862248 0.244688304435 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0562591544596 0.084324248473 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0571424773141 0.0667982634062 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.120717805527 0.151304729494 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0340033249183 0.056905535591 60% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.0946893788 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 50.2224549098 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.5 12.4159519038 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.35 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 78.4519038076 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.