Some people think that excessive use of smartphones badly affects a teenager’s literacy skills. Do you agree or disagree?
It is believed that spending much time on mobile phones has negative impacts on the writing and reading abilities of young people. In my opinion, I am in favor of those who completely agree with this view.
Firstly, using excessively the amount of time on phones is considered as the main culprit causing a decrease in the literacy proficiency of youngsters. This stems from the fact that they have not enough time for academic studies at schools as well as the lack of time for their assignments at home, which means hours spent on mobile phones is not useful. Therefore, studying by the traditional education method should be encouraged instead. Secondly, adolescents have a tendency to interact with their friends via applications integrated in smartphones nowadays. They occasionally convey their ideas based on weird abbreviations and emotional icons which seem to be not familiar with someone who is from the former generation. Subsequently, making use of this means of communication is a contributing factor to the conventional words standard and expressions. In conclusion, the written communication skills of the young generation may be inferior to senior ones or those who are fond of reading.
Recently, students have stuck their eyes hourly on phones’ screens for entertainment purposes, even read neither newspapers nor magazines while earlier people have frequently devoted their leisure time to bury in books or novels. As a result, they might be a shortage of knowledge about the surrounding world and being unlikely isolated when joining an environment that includes old people.
To conclude, by the above-mentioned reasons, I think that teenagers hook into their smartphones may be poor in reading and writing skills.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 741, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rom the former generation. Subsequently, making use of this means of communicatio...
^^
Line 3, column 830, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'words'' or 'word's'?
Suggestion: words'; word's
...contributing factor to the conventional words standard and expressions. In conclusion...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, while, i think, in conclusion, as a result, as well as, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 24.0651302605 91% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 41.998997996 98% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1469.0 1615.20841683 91% => OK
No of words: 276.0 315.596192385 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.32246376812 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07593519647 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03744009374 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 176.041082164 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.634057971014 0.561755894193 113% => OK
syllable_count: 450.0 506.74238477 89% => 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: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.7579001175 49.4020404114 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.416666667 106.682146367 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0 20.7667163134 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.1666666667 7.06120827912 158% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
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: 0.0900095786246 0.244688304435 37% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.033398863477 0.084324248473 40% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0391255606799 0.0667982634062 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0557954572378 0.151304729494 37% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0360047383046 0.056905535591 63% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 13.0946893788 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 50.2224549098 96% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.87 12.4159519038 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.81 8.58950901804 114% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 78.4519038076 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.78957915832 148% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.