Children rely too much on the technology, like computers, smart phones, video games for fun and entertainment. Playing simpler toys or playing outside with friends would be better for children’s development.
In the modern era which technology is developing fast, raising children is challenging issue for all parents. Some parents permit their children to use technology, like computers, smart phones, video games freely. While other parents limit their children access, and prevent them to rely too much on the technology, for they believe playing simpler toys or playing outside with friends would be better for children’s development. There are strong grounds for believing that children should not rely too much on the technology, and it will be better for them to play simpler toys or play outside with friends, and the following paragraphs will aptly elucidate them.
The first vital point to bear in mind is that all technologies has harmful effects for children’s health. For instance, staring too much at monitor can affect their eyesight, or electromagnetic waves of these devices have detrimental impacts on their mental health. Furthermore, children’s activity plays a key role in their development, and playing outside with friend can provide a physical activity for them, and physical activities guarantee children’s physical health. For clarifying, I can mention my own experience as a child. When I was 12 years old, my parents bought a computer for firs time. Before that, I was always outside playing with friends. After that I was playing more than two hours every day with computer. Consequently, my eyesight got weak, and forced me to use glasses. If I did not play too much video games, my sight would be excellent right now.
The second noteworthy reason is that when children play outside with friends, they can find more friends, and they communicate with more people. As a result, they become social persons and they can interact people easily. For example, I have many friends that I introduced with them during outside games. In addition, social person can be more successful than others, for they can get help from people they know. For justifying my ideas, I can mention my own experience again. When I was a child, I was playing football with my friends and neighbor’s children, and at these games I met many people. Years later, I was searching for a job, and I see one of my childhood’s friend accidentally. I explained my situation for him, and he said that he knows a person at a company whom can help me to employ there. Eventually, I found a good position at that company, and I had all of that because of my friend’s help.
In short, all the aforementioned reasons lead us to draw a conclusion that it is better for children’s development to play outside with friends or play simple toys rather than depend on the technologies. It is highly recommended that parents force their children to play with their friends and limit their access to technologies.
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The competition between friends always has negative effect. 73
- TPO43 85
- When you give money to charitable organizations do you prefer to choose how the donation will be used for example donate money on food or service or advertisement for organizations or leave the decision to the organizations 87
- Children rely too much on the technology, like computers, smart phones, video games for fun and entertainment. Playing simpler toys or playing outside with friends would be better for children’s development. 73
- TPO47 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 675, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “After” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...as always outside playing with friends. After that I was playing more than two hours ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, first, furthermore, if, second, so, while, for example, for instance, in addition, in short, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 15.1003584229 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 9.8082437276 143% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 13.8261648746 130% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.0286738351 145% => OK
Pronoun: 68.0 43.0788530466 158% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 50.0 52.1666666667 96% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.0752688172 136% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2373.0 1977.66487455 120% => OK
No of words: 469.0 407.700716846 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05970149254 4.8611393121 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65364457471 4.48103885553 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97498294145 2.67179642975 111% => OK
Unique words: 230.0 212.727598566 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.490405117271 0.524837075471 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 689.4 618.680645161 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 14.0 9.59856630824 146% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.51792114695 199% => OK
Conjunction: 12.0 1.86738351254 643% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.6003584229 117% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.2548739293 48.9658058833 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.875 100.406767564 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5416666667 20.6045352989 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.91666666667 5.45110844103 90% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 19.0 11.8709677419 160% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.85842293907 26% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.524510427469 0.236089414692 222% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.151877371153 0.076458572812 199% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.135234075471 0.0737576698707 183% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.370172034001 0.150856017488 245% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.16994147718 0.0645574589148 263% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 11.7677419355 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 58.1214874552 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.1575268817 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 10.9000537634 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.98 8.01818996416 100% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 86.8835125448 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.002688172 145% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.247311828 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 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: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
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.