The younger generation is mainly responsible for latest technological developments. How far do you agree?
These days, the role of young people in progress of technology is increasing sharply. Some politicians claim that growing population should take responsibility for this progress, while some teachers are opposed to them and argue this obligation lies with others. In this essay, I will discuss both opinions and agree with teachers.
Let us start by looking at the reasons why some politicians argue that youngsters should lead the technological evolution. The first reason is that they are more creative. They tend to come up with original ideas easily, so that they can make a great contribution to cutting-edge advances. Another reason is that they have more spare time. In contrast to adults, young people can allocate a considerable amount of time to technological development, because they both have no families to take care and job to do. After the consideration of the reasons, it is clear that growing generation should take the lead in technological improvement.
On the other hand, some teachers believe that young people should not take part in high-tech advancement. They justify their point of view with the following arguments. First of all, they should have proper childhood. If children played a major role in developing technology, then they would suffer from lack of social skills, since they would not have normal childhood to develop necessary skills for life in society. Secondly, they are not thoroughly experienced. Young people can make a crucial mistake in technological progress and, therefore, ruin projects, as they are inexperienced as well as cannot take account of important features. After the analysis of these argumentations, it is obvious that young people should participate in technological development.
In conclusion, even though some politicians make a statement that technological progress predominantly lies with young people, personally, I believe that they should not meddle with it.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 190, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...onsibility for this progress, while some teachers are opposed to them and argue t...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, look, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, well, while, in conclusion, in contrast, as well as, first of all, in contrast to, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 7.85571142285 178% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 10.4138276553 38% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 24.0651302605 145% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 41.0 41.998997996 98% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1635.0 1615.20841683 101% => OK
No of words: 302.0 315.596192385 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.41390728477 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1687104957 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05941091971 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 176.041082164 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.556291390728 0.561755894193 99% => OK
syllable_count: 500.4 506.74238477 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 2.10420841683 428% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 52.6193486063 49.4020404114 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.1764705882 106.682146367 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.7647058824 20.7667163134 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.47058823529 7.06120827912 134% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0984105630888 0.244688304435 40% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.031715945199 0.084324248473 38% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.030431697608 0.0667982634062 46% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0617310462948 0.151304729494 41% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0202583137509 0.056905535591 36% => 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: 12.9 13.0946893788 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 50.2224549098 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.8 12.4159519038 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.3 8.58950901804 97% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 78.4519038076 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.