childrens rely on technology for entetainment but playin outside with friendsis better for them
Development of science and technology is conducive to changing the playing style among children. There also have been two contrasting attitudes toward this, while some believe that playing outside with friends is better for children, others adhere to the idea that nowadays best devices for playing are computers or smartphones because parents can control children. I support the former perspective. In what follows, I will elaborate on my viewpoint.
To begin with, playing with friend improves the social characteristics of children. Since they live in metropolitan cities, they should learn necessary skills for living among people in future. Some important skills that children can achieve through playing are social responsibility, teamwork and self-confidence. The Asian society of preserving children found that about 70 of young who have major conflicts with others, do not learn essential abilities to have a reliable behavior among people. This example aptly illuminates that promoting the social skills through playing with friend breeds a prosperous future for children.
Another equally noteworthy point to be mentioned is that parents can control children's behavior through playing with simple toys than children who play with computer. Social media have various aspects and children are able to access to different thing through that. Curious children usually use electronic devices for searching through internet coincide with playing games so this action creates many predicaments for them. To shed light on this matter, I will bring up an example in with I was involved. In the second year of bachelor studies in university, we had an assignment related to psychology class to find a relationship between playing games and crimes. The results showed that most of criminals had freedom behavior when they were child. They had easy access to computers to play games but during this time they get more information about different issues like trafficking drugs or domestic violence so this information affect their future behavior. Therefore, playing with electronic devices needs some preparation before it to avoid children from violence behavior.
In brief, contemplating on aforementioned reasons, one can logically draw the conclusion that playing with toys or friends help children to improve their social behaviors and personal skills. All in all, it is highly recommended that parents should prevent children to play with computers because they can access to some information that is not expedient for them.
- in the past it was easier to identify what kinds of careea have successful future 3
- because modern life is complex, it is essential for young people to have the ability to plan and organize 60
- which one give you better informtion for selecting for taking vacation. asking someone or reading online 76
- when a teacher or a leader say something incorrect. in which way do you prefer to say him. after meeting or between it or do not say something 76
- people benefit more from travelling in their own country than from travelling to foreign countries 65
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 266, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[4]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'nowadays the best'.
Suggestion: nowadays the best
...hildren, others adhere to the idea that nowadays best devices for playing are computers or sm...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 183, Rule ID: IN_PAST[1]
Message: Did you mean: 'in the future'?
Suggestion: in the future
...ecessary skills for living among people in future. Some important skills that children ca...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 689, Rule ID: MOST_SOME_OF_NNS[1]
Message: After 'most of', you should use 'the' ('most of the criminals') or simply say ''most criminals''.
Suggestion: most of the criminals; most criminals
...mes and crimes. The results showed that most of criminals had freedom behavior when they were chi...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, second, so, therefore, while, in brief, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 15.1003584229 79% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 9.8082437276 92% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 13.8261648746 65% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.0286738351 127% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 43.0788530466 81% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 52.1666666667 123% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.0752688172 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2147.0 1977.66487455 109% => OK
No of words: 388.0 407.700716846 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.53350515464 4.8611393121 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.43821085614 4.48103885553 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79494000038 2.67179642975 105% => OK
Unique words: 218.0 212.727598566 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.561855670103 0.524837075471 107% => OK
syllable_count: 632.7 618.680645161 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 9.59856630824 83% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.6003584229 92% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.1344086022 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.1756296999 48.9658058833 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.0 100.406767564 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4210526316 20.6045352989 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.57894736842 5.45110844103 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 11.8709677419 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.248083576855 0.236089414692 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.082454865157 0.076458572812 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0770067661442 0.0737576698707 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.179522877524 0.150856017488 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0354106245798 0.0645574589148 55% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 11.7677419355 126% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 58.1214874552 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.1575268817 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.79 10.9000537634 136% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.9 8.01818996416 111% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 86.8835125448 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.002688172 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.0537634409 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 86.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.0 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.