People learn more by watching television than by reading books.
Many would say that people learn more by watching television than by reading books. In some sense, it is true that visual materials help effective learning. However, I still believe that reading books is the best way to get detail information about a specific topic.
Of course, it is undeniable that watching television is deemed as an effective way of learning. Television provides useful information in a captivating way for people who tend to lose concentration while learning. For example, a Korean broadcast EBS makes educational television programs that cover elementary school curriculums. Students who feel bored when reading textbooks can learn by watching these programs.
However, I still believe that television programs are limited to deal with broadly enjoyable subjects. Program directors mainly concern about the public’s interest, so they only deal with topics that can be attractive to laymen. However, authors have more freedom in selecting the topic and writing about their specialized fields. For example, I wanted to know details about a Korean engineer who invented a special type of air conditioner. He was not popular enough, so there is no video material about him. However, I found information about him in a book dealing with engineers who were unpopular but had great achievement. This example illustrates that books can fulfill people’s minor interest while television cannot.
Moreover, it is hard to make television shows to contain a lot of detail information. Making a video entails enormous efforts compared with writing a book. This is why a book normally contains more knowledge than a television show. To illustrate, when I was a freshman at my university, I studied Korean history with a documentary program on television. At first, it was an effective and interesting way to study history. However, when I wanted to learn more on the professional level, the television program was no longer an appropriate material for me. Instead of it, textbooks provide me an apt knowledge with sufficient details. In this regard, books are more suitable materials to study than television.
In sum, I firmly believe that people learn more by reading books than watching television. Books can deal with various topics with enough details compared to television programs. Taken together, I think It would be best to encourage students to read more books.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-08-04 | Uttama Shekhawat | 71 | view |
| 2021-10-03 | nida fatima | 80 | view |
| 2020-06-03 | Seyed Armin Mirhosseini | 80 | view |
| 2019-10-24 | p0uya | 73 | view |
| 2019-10-03 | dodo1212 | 83 | view |
- All college students should take a public speaking course that teaches how to speak well in front of many people before graduation. 71
- All college students should take a public speaking course that teaches how to speak well in front of many people before graduation. 76
- Claim: In any field-business, politics, education, government- those in power should step down after five years. Reason: The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership. 50
- All college students should take a public speaking course that teaches how to speak well in front of many people before graduation. 76
- All college students should take a public speaking course that teaches how to speak well in front of many people before graduation. 83
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 268, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ail information about a specific topic. Of course, it is undeniable that watchin...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, moreover, so, still, while, for example, i think, of course, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 22.412803532 161% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 48.0 30.3222958057 158% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2023.0 1373.03311258 147% => OK
No of words: 380.0 270.72406181 140% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.32368421053 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41515443553 4.04702891845 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93117142589 2.5805825403 114% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 145.348785872 136% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.518421052632 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 626.4 419.366225166 149% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 14.0 3.25607064018 430% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 2.0 8.23620309051 24% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 2.5761589404 272% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 13.0662251656 191% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 19.6613732989 49.2860985944 40% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 80.92 110.228320801 73% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.2 21.698381199 70% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.84 7.06452816374 54% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 4.33554083885 277% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.27373068433 211% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.356308823684 0.272083759551 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.111294904595 0.0996497079465 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.168039646042 0.0662205650399 254% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.259580846105 0.162205337803 160% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.144227526198 0.0443174109184 325% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.2 13.3589403974 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 53.8541721854 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.98 12.2367328918 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.58 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 63.6247240618 159% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 65.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 19.5 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.