technology has made children less creative than they were in the past
Undoubtedly, technology is one of the most important aspects of our life. Technology is very useful and profitable for comfortable and modern life. Technology has numerous effects on children, which some of them are positive and some are negative for children. Personally, I rather agree with the statement.
First, technology is interesting and attracting for children. One of the most widely spread technology is television. Television programs such as animations are highly attracting for children and children get massive influence from animations’ heroes and celebrities, which was not in the past. The children like to imitate animations’ characters speeches and acts. First decade of children's life is vital period and at this time human character form. Imitation is opposed to creativity and children with imitation of the characters lose their creativity. When I was a child, we play football in the garden every day, there was a cartoon that name was The Soccer. That was about the children that played football and after a lot of practice and effort they enrolled into the national football team of Japan and they win international cup. The cartoon was amazing and we loved to watch it. After watching we went to garden, but we did not play football. Actually, we only imitate and repeat the scene of the cartoon. We were interested to be a champion of football, but without right practice that was impossible. After while we abandoned football and we started to learn Kong Fu because Panda was a Kong Fu master. Imitation is the enemy of creativity. If we practice a lot and we had a good coach who could detect our talent and help us, maybe we were able to be successful in sport.
Second, children spend a lot of their time to playing video games. Some of these games are harmful to children's brain and makers of these games always do not attention to growth of children creativity. Overwhelming in the play of these games leads children to be exhausted and also activity of these children is low. Creativity of children is related to activity and attempt to learn so spending more time to play with video games are waste of time and also harmful to children. Nowadays, children have a plenty of toys such as robots or electric cars and dulls or even real cell phone. My father told me when he was in the primary school there was no toys for children and children in the village made their own toys by themselves. Girls made dull with wood and cloth and the boys made wooden car. Children were very creative that time because there was nothing to play and they had to try to get their desire to making toys or homes with natural and simple materials.
In comparison of today with the past children are less creative. In the modern life children learn to be consumer not a producer and this is one of the negative results of technology.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-10-08 | nguyenthaian0127 | 90 | view |
| 2023-08-21 | yuktapradeep | 60 | view |
| 2023-06-09 | theprasad | 66 | view |
| 2023-05-18 | fanassertive | 71 | view |
| 2023-05-18 | weiwei | 70 | view |
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate 50
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement A teacher s ability to relate well with students is more important than excellent knowledge of the subject being taught 60
- cooperation & competition 16
- technology has made children less creative than they were in the past 78
- one of the best ways that parents can help their teenage children prepare for adult life is to encourage them to take a part-time job 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 4, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[2]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: comparison,
... with natural and simple materials. In comparison of today with the past children are les...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, if, may, second, so, while, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 34.0 15.1003584229 225% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 9.8082437276 10% => OK
Conjunction : 33.0 13.8261648746 239% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.0286738351 91% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 43.0788530466 93% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 52.1666666667 134% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.0752688172 74% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2371.0 1977.66487455 120% => OK
No of words: 494.0 407.700716846 121% => OK
Chars per words: 4.7995951417 4.8611393121 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71445763274 4.48103885553 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69646037537 2.67179642975 101% => OK
Unique words: 237.0 212.727598566 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.47975708502 0.524837075471 91% => OK
syllable_count: 750.6 618.680645161 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 9.59856630824 63% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.994623655914 101% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 29.0 20.6003584229 141% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.1344086022 84% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.3601208857 48.9658058833 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 81.7586206897 100.406767564 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0344827586 20.6045352989 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.1724137931 5.45110844103 40% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 18.0 11.8709677419 152% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 3.85842293907 233% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.281039513952 0.236089414692 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0730028866518 0.076458572812 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0587220625188 0.0737576698707 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.169783218565 0.150856017488 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0309421167206 0.0645574589148 48% => 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: 9.7 11.7677419355 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 58.1214874552 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 10.1575268817 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.26 10.9000537634 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.48 8.01818996416 93% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 86.8835125448 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.002688172 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.0537634409 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.