Some believe that lot of scientific research is a waste of time and money. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Many people hold the belief that classical games, instead of modern ones, can improve children's wide range of abilities. From my perspective, while I think some soft skills can be developed by playing traditional games, I disagree with this view for several reasons.
It is undeniable that classical games can promote social skill development. In fact, most of them are team bonding games, which requires players to team up. By joining a group, children will learn how to communicate and cooperate with others. This is believed to enhance their development in social skills along well with their opportunities in future careers. Dragon snake, a genre of Vietnamese traditional game, for instance, requires children to form a long line called “dragon-snake”. The head of this line have to converse and negotiate with other members to prevent the last child from being touched by their opponent. In some ways, the head will be encouraged to develop leadership skills, which is extraordinary useful in the competitive job market.
Contemporary games, however, play a very important role in the information age, requiring not only social skills but also technological ones. The majority of modern games are only available in the Internet or high-tech devices; therefore, children need to figure out how to use them to join games. The more children play modern games, the more proficient at such gadgets they are. This proficiency enables young players to achieve efficiency in many activities related to technology. Furthermore, contemporary games allow children to approach a novel environment known as a virtual world where they can be any characters and see extraordinary things. Their imagination will be nurtured and they tend to reconstitute what they saw, creating a bright future for the world.
In conclusion, while I support the idea that traditional games can strengthen children’s abilities to communicate and collaborate, contemporary ones can nurture their imagination and help them master technological skills in the age of technology.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-10-10 | Oliviachenlu | 61 | view |
| 2019-08-30 | tominhduc | 11 | view |
| 2019-07-28 | PRAMODH k | 56 | view |
| 2019-03-29 | Rohail Ali | 73 | view |
| 2018-12-28 | Kamaldeep | 73 | view |
- Public libraries should only provide books and should not waste their limited resources on expensive high-tech media such as software, videos or DVDs. Do you agree or disagree? 78
- Some believe that lot of scientific research is a waste of time and money. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 11
- Research shows that business meetings, discussions and training are happening online nowadays. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages? 78
- When designing a building, the most important factor is intended use of the building rather than its outward appearance. To what extent do you agree or disagree ? 61
- The graph below shows the differences in wheat exports over three different areas.Write a report for a university lecturer describing the information shown below. 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, however, so, then, therefore, well, while, for instance, i think, in conclusion, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 24.0651302605 100% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 41.998997996 107% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1762.0 1615.20841683 109% => OK
No of words: 321.0 315.596192385 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.48909657321 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23278547379 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.20138895139 2.80592935109 114% => OK
Unique words: 190.0 176.041082164 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.591900311526 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 549.0 506.74238477 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.7907267674 49.4020404114 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.125 106.682146367 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0625 20.7667163134 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 7.06120827912 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.03016533144 0.244688304435 12% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0104258528291 0.084324248473 12% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0190608946036 0.0667982634062 29% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0202094479682 0.151304729494 13% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0166202410395 0.056905535591 29% => 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: 14.5 13.0946893788 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 50.2224549098 85% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.56 12.4159519038 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.01 8.58950901804 105% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 78.4519038076 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 11.2359550562 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.