Some people believe that reading stories from a book is better than watching tv or playing computer games for children. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Along with the advances of civilizations, open-minded people currently have changed their conventional beliefs in the desire to fully train young learners. Instead of using printed books, freeing children from watching TV or playing games seemingly creates better results. I, as a fervent advocate of this movement, confidently assert that due to children’s cognitive development and psychology the latter approach is worth trying.
On the one hand, books are no longer considered an effective tool to be employed in teaching young learners because of human cognition. According to Piaget’s theory relating to four stages of cognitive development, those in the age of 2 to 11 are in the preoperational and concrete operational phases, which means abstract knowledge presented in academic books or even language syntax in comic books would be great obstacles for children to understand. Therefore, it is likely an arduous task to require them to spend hours of their beautiful life reading books, things that students find no interest in. Even more woeful is the poor efficiency that this training method brings back since the meaningful moral lessons conveyed in the material could not reach readers in these age groups.
On the other hand, TV or computer game are able to prove their potential roles in stimulating the interest and supporting the academic performance of young learners. Regarding benefits from the TV platform, large masses of specialists and non-specialists express their strong supports since it can draw students’ attention for hours while they watch their favorite programs. Now that the vivid scenes and catchy sounds are of importance to boost children’s memory. This suggests that kids can memorize knowledge longer and more accurately. When it comes to the computer game, notwithstanding previous censures about its adverse impact on players’ mental and physical health, recent studies of an Australian university have indicated that children playing with game figures find it easy to create their own stories. However, only a few months ago, their teachers received a myriad of complaints as these young learners did not know how to commence their stories. Hence, computer games enable to aid learners in their academic performance.
In conclusion, there would not be books, but television and computer games that become effective training tools in educating young students.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-07 | Phuong1810 | 73 | view |
| 2023-08-30 | ophongcute@gmail.com | 84 | view |
| 2023-08-01 | dieulinhxinhgai | 73 | view |
| 2023-07-25 | pwlihnkt | 84 | view |
| 2023-03-18 | bepmy2992004 | 67 | view |
- Task Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world Do you agree or disagree 80
- The chart below shows the changes that took place in three different areas of crime in Panama City from 2010 to 2019
- Some people say free time activities for children should be organized by parents Others say that children should be free to choose what they do in their free time Discuss both views and give your opinion 95
- The maps below show the changes that have taken place at the waterfront area of a town called Darwin between 2009 and 2014 78
- The use of mobile phones should be banned in public places like libraries and shops To what extent do you agree or disagree 84
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, however, if, regarding, so, therefore, while, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 24.0651302605 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 51.0 41.998997996 121% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2043.0 1615.20841683 126% => OK
No of words: 374.0 315.596192385 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.46256684492 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.3976220399 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86795212967 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 176.041082164 132% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.622994652406 0.561755894193 111% => OK
syllable_count: 604.8 506.74238477 119% => 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: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.3562544826 49.4020404114 132% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.2 106.682146367 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.9333333333 20.7667163134 120% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 7.06120827912 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.182958963417 0.244688304435 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0581885372124 0.084324248473 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0591272999053 0.0667982634062 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.105237404515 0.151304729494 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.042447316727 0.056905535591 75% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.8 13.0946893788 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 50.2224549098 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.68 12.4159519038 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.94 8.58950901804 116% => OK
difficult_words: 121.0 78.4519038076 154% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.