Studies suggest that many teenagers these days prefer socialising online to meeting one another in person.
Why do you think this is the case?
What measures could be taken to encourage teenagers to spend more time meeting one another in person?
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.
You should spend about 40 minutes on this tas
In this day and age, it is proved by some studies that teenagers have a preference on online socialisation instead of face-to-face meetings. This reality is catalysed by some reasons and it can also be changed by particular measures.
The first reason bringing teenagers closer to socialise through the Internet is its ability to connect with people far from you without leaving your place to arrive there. For instance, with wireless networks and social media, a Vietnamese person can effortlessly keep in touch with his or her friend on the other side of the Earth, such as a friend in the US or Canada, through video calls and messages. The second attraction of online socialisation is the opportunity to overcome the fear of communication. Some teenagers, especially introverts, tend to be quiet in a face-to-face meeting due to the fact that they are worried about saying something wrong or they cannot think fast enough to respond immediately and continue the conversation. All these fears can be easily solved with texting applications like Messenger, Telegram or even Instagram.
Nevertheless, there are still ways to enhance the amount of time teenagers spend on meeting one another in person for people who find socialising online not as good as the others say. Firstly, it is believed that teenage girls and boys should join more extracurricular activities instead of staying home, lying on the bed and using phones, laptops, tablets, etc.... all day. To participate in real life activities brings them the ability to either broaden their horizon or develop their relationships. Some new relationships created through these activities can teach people that not all your friends are able to be online to wait for your messages or calls. Secondly, teenagers should learn that socialising online can also be risky. Online crimes and identity thieves are no longer strange notions. Without the right guide, people can be a sweet food for criminals when they trust those bad guys as their soulmates.
In conclusion, online socialising is a modern method of communication that we cannot deny its effects and benefits. However, we should also remain meeting people in person.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, however, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, still, for instance, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 10.4138276553 144% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 24.0651302605 133% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 48.0 41.998997996 114% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1829.0 1615.20841683 113% => OK
No of words: 354.0 315.596192385 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16666666667 5.12529762239 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33761313653 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87059166904 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 210.0 176.041082164 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.593220338983 0.561755894193 106% => OK
syllable_count: 568.8 506.74238477 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
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: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.381588143 49.4020404114 120% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.3125 106.682146367 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.125 20.7667163134 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.125 7.06120827912 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.260833776606 0.244688304435 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0786371425183 0.084324248473 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0706086036592 0.0667982634062 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.150795801099 0.151304729494 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0407442518561 0.056905535591 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.0946893788 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 50.2224549098 98% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 12.4159519038 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.7 8.58950901804 101% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 78.4519038076 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.78957915832 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.