Mass media and the internet have caused people’s attention spans to get shorter. However, the overall effect has been positive: while people are less able to focus on one thing, they more than make up for it with an enhanced ability to sort through large quantities of information and find what’s important.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
Glancing back through the history, one can undoubtedly notice that there is no time in the history that people's learning processes and approaches have been changed more quickly and dramatically than recent centuries. When it comes to if these changes influence people positively, there is always a heated debate. As far as I am concerned, I agree with this prompt statement for the following reasons.
First of all, the main factor I consider is that the ability to find important stuff among a bunch of information saves people time and effort for them to do things that are truly meaningful. After thousands of years' development, human society has accumulated a big amount of knowledge. While the life span of a person is limited, it is impossible for he or she to master every single skill on the world. Therefore, it is crucial for people to have the ability to filter out what is useless and catch the pithy part from the mass resource we can easily get by key in some keywords on search engines. Thus, I would say the effect of recent technology and mass media is positive overall.
Opponents for this statement may argue that it is terrible for students to have short attention spans as they are likely to be distracted by their electronic devices or other stuff every several minutes during the lecture. However, as long as we truly figure out what is the best learning strategy for students in this generation, this should not be a problem. For example, instead of deliver a full length lecture, teachers can pause the lecture for a while and let students do self-learning by searching materials on the internet or discussing with classmates.
To sum up, despite it cannot be denied that people's attention spans are negatively influenced by the mass media and internet, as long as we have good self-awareness on this problem, we can easily solve it. What these floods of information eventually brings us is the more important ability on catch the essential part and make people more efficient on learning.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-17 | srujanakeerthi | 66 | view |
| 2019-12-17 | srujanakeerthi | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-17 | srujanakeerthi | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-15 | Chayank_11 | 33 | view |
| 2019-12-05 | Opak Pulu | 50 | view |
- The following appeared in a letter from the faculty committee to the president of Seatown University:A study conducted at nearby Oceania University showed that faculty retention is higher when professors are offered free tuition at the university for thei 62
- Claim: Even though young people often receive the advice to “follow your dreams,” more emphasis should be placed on picking worthy goals.Reason: Many people’s dreams are inherently selfish.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which 50
- Educational institutions should dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed.Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and su 50
- The primary goal of technological advancement should be to increase people's efficiency so that they have more leisure time.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for t 50
- Although innovations such as video, computers, and the Internet seem to offer schools improved methods for instructing students, these technologies all too often distract from real learning.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agr 66
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, may, so, therefore, thus, while, for example, in fact, first of all, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 33.0 33.0505617978 100% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 58.6224719101 70% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 12.9106741573 70% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1679.0 2235.4752809 75% => OK
No of words: 345.0 442.535393258 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.86666666667 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.3097767484 4.55969084622 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71669517654 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 215.323595506 92% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.576811594203 0.4932671777 117% => OK
syllable_count: 532.8 704.065955056 76% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Interrogative: 2.0 0.740449438202 270% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 20.2370786517 64% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 23.0359550562 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.3182436389 60.3974514979 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.153846154 118.986275619 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.5384615385 23.4991977007 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.53846153846 5.21951772744 144% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.292947981154 0.243740707755 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0893670471077 0.0831039109588 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0447972374008 0.0758088955206 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.168762360537 0.150359130593 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0327473893133 0.0667264976115 49% => 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: 14.8 14.1392134831 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 48.8420337079 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.26 12.1639044944 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.72 8.38706741573 104% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 100.480337079 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.2143820225 111% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.