Some people believe that reading stories from books better than watching TV or playing computer games for children. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
There are beliefs that spending a day with a book and you are an intellectual, but spend a day watching television or playing computer games and you become a couch potato. From my perspective, this is a real fact that books are superior to televisions and video games. In this essay, I will explain my views and give examples.
Various reasons can be put forward to elaborate why children should prefer books, and one of the most preponderant ones is that reading requires intellectual endeavours, even if it is a comic, and television is lowbrow entertainment geared toward the lowest common denominator. More precisely, when we read, we have to use our imagination, creativity and critical thinking in order to understand the content more efficiently and deeply. According to Japan’s research, such experiences barely happen when children watch televisions. For instance, children can easily absorb and understand Aladdin’s stories quickly by one hour movie; however, if they read this story in the book or the comic, there are no limits to imaginative thinking. Therefore, their mental skills will be sharpened, and they can even understand the metaphorical meaning behind the stories.
Apart from sharping mental skills for children, Japanese research has proven that children can gain both productive and receptive skills, by interacting with books. When it comes to long-life learning, electronics devices can only offer a passive method of absorbing information undermines intellectual development. In other words, children only take information instead of interact with them. On the other hand, reading allows the young to assimilate input and build their own vocabulary banks, and this is an effective way of improving written and spoken language proficiency. A clear example can be given is that some children actually read the books out loud, which then improves their pronunciations and fluency. These processes can never be done with vivid pictures on screen since there are very less chances that viewers can have reactions directly.
In conclusion, we really need to be mindful with the adverse impacts growing from digital devices and promote the reading habits among the young generations.
| 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 |
- Most people have forgotten the meaning behind traditional or religious festivals during festival periods people nowadays only want to enjoy themselves To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion 78
- Families who send their children to private schools should not be required to pay taxes that support the state education system 56
- The table below shows the amount of waste producti in millions of tonnes in six different cuntries over a twenty year period 67
- Most people have forgotten the meaning behind traditional or religious festivals during festival periods people nowadays only want to enjoy themselves To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion 84
- Some people say it is important to keep your home and your workplace tidy with everything organised and in the correct place What is your opinion about this 61
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 804, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun chances is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...pictures on screen since there are very less chances that viewers can have reactions...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, however, if, really, so, then, therefore, apart from, for instance, in conclusion, in my view, in other words, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 10.4138276553 182% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 24.0651302605 116% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 41.998997996 83% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1866.0 1615.20841683 116% => OK
No of words: 348.0 315.596192385 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.36206896552 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31911543099 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9009613397 2.80592935109 103% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 176.041082164 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.629310344828 0.561755894193 112% => OK
syllable_count: 572.4 506.74238477 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 0.809619238477 618% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.762613026 49.4020404114 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.4 106.682146367 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2 20.7667163134 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.53333333333 7.06120827912 135% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.183505368852 0.244688304435 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0569890992619 0.084324248473 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0544444834469 0.0667982634062 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.103804447837 0.151304729494 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0373978814091 0.056905535591 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 13.0946893788 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 50.2224549098 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.1 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.68 8.58950901804 113% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 78.4519038076 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.78957915832 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => 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.