Technology has made children less creative than they were in the past.
Although technological innovations have improved our life significantly, the question remains whether they have negative implications. Personally, I am prone to believe that technology actually makes our children less creative. I hold this opinion for several reasons, which I will explore in the following essay.
To begin with, children spend more time watching TV than they were spending in the past. This is because there are a lot of programs and shows that attract kids and make them increasingly dependent on these programs and shows. This dependency keeps them away from activities, which develop their creativity. For instance, my son watches TV all the day long instead of painting, singing and doing other things that would have positive influence on his creative thinking. So, basically, the development of the TV prevent them from exercising their mental abilities.
Additionally, the Internet and devices providing access to it are another obstacle for developing children's creative characteristics. This is explained by the fact that children explore the world around them mainly through the Internet. Meanwhile, when we were children we were using our thoughts and senses directly to discover the events and phenomena of the real life. My own experience is a compelling example of this. When I was a child I was spending a lot of time outdoors with my parents and friends and was able to understand the world by myself rather than through the Internet. Travelling a lot and meeting new people helped me become a complete human being with a great creativity.
Finally, invention of computers made our kids less creative. Computers do everything instead of children. There is a variety of programs, which paint, sing, read and write with minimal human involvement. Our children rely on them too much nowadays - a fact, which also leads to non-development of their creative features. For example, at schools in my country kids learn drawing with the use of special computer programs. It is not hard to imagine to what extent it harms our children.
To sum up briefly, it is a fact that technological revolution makes our children less creative. Its explanation is quite simple: TV, the Internet and computers do not develop our children's skills of creative thinking.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-10-08 | nguyenthaian0127 | 90 | view |
| 2023-08-21 | yuktapradeep | 60 | view |
| 2023-06-09 | theprasad | 66 | view |
| 2023-05-18 | fanassertive | 71 | view |
| 2023-05-18 | weiwei | 70 | view |
- This material addresses the questions of whether the zebra mussel's invasion to North America might be stopped, and whether this fish would dominate in their new habitat. 81
- TPO 13- Private collectors have been selling and buying fossils, the petrified remains of ancient organisms, ever since the eighteenth century. In recent years, however, the sale of fossils, particularly of dinosaurs and other large vertebrates, has grown 90
- TPO-3: Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on specific points made reading passage.Rembrandt is the most famous of the seventeenth-century Dutch painters. However, there are doubts whether some paintings att 80
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Young people devote less time to helping their communities nowadays than were they in past. 70
- Written paragraph:In many organizations, perhaps the best way to approach certain new projects is toassemble a group of people into a team. Having a team of people attack a project offersseveral advantages. First of all, a group of people has a wider rang 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 371, Rule ID: AFFORD_VBG[1]
Message: This verb is used with infinitive: 'to draw'.
Suggestion: to draw
...le, at schools in my country kids learn drawing with the use of special computer progra...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, briefly, finally, if, so, while, for example, for instance, to begin with, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 15.1003584229 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 9.8082437276 20% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 13.8261648746 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 48.0 43.0788530466 111% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 52.1666666667 81% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.0752688172 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1915.0 1977.66487455 97% => OK
No of words: 368.0 407.700716846 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.20380434783 4.8611393121 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37987740619 4.48103885553 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92433146453 2.67179642975 109% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 212.727598566 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.576086956522 0.524837075471 110% => OK
syllable_count: 576.9 618.680645161 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 9.59856630824 115% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.94265232975 61% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.1344086022 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.2317281187 48.9658058833 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 87.0454545455 100.406767564 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.7272727273 20.6045352989 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.54545454545 5.45110844103 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 11.8709677419 118% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.85842293907 52% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.88709677419 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.274577704101 0.236089414692 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0709867259788 0.076458572812 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0739606288942 0.0737576698707 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.144392196548 0.150856017488 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0242740367563 0.0645574589148 38% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 11.7677419355 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 58.1214874552 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.1575268817 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.58 10.9000537634 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.33 8.01818996416 104% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 86.8835125448 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.002688172 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.0537634409 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.