Children obtain diverse methods to improve for themselves. While some young people make an effort to exploit the technologies for their developments, other play the toys without complex or outside with their friends. It is so controvertible for people to determine a specific conclusion. In my view, young people should utilize simple toys and hang out with friends for their growth. These activities produce them common sense, potential to boost their improvement, and without thinking about concerns.
To begin with, young people assemble common sense by playing outside with friends and uncomplicated toys. In their future, they have to hold practical judgement in bountiful circumstances of society so as to match and be recognized by other people. Generally speaking, people often reach the opportunities to attain this knowledge at an early age. For instance, when children play with friends outside, they sometimes face the situations to communicate with others as much as possible. If they do not create enough conversations with others, they will not be capable of satisfying with pleasure. As a result, children should not depend on some technologies but play with friends and regular toys.
Secondly, playing toys or outside with friends produces children sophisticated development. It is so limited for the progress of children to be educated by parents or teachers. The viewpoint by these people represents only educational teachings. However, their friends diverse the possibility of their evolutions by the psychological perspective. For example, they sometimes obtain the situation to care about their friends about anxieties while playing outside. From this experience, they acquire how to treat humans and stand by their friends. Therefore, their personality will advance more than young people who rely on many technologies.
Finally, children devote on plays without anxieties to play simple toys and with friends outside. They have to remind many operations to exploit the technologies for entertainment. In the television games, they keep in mind how to press bottoms for complete missions. On the other hand, in plays with simple toys and with friends outside, they just converge on pleasure because these activities do not include hard rules and principles. Consequently, young people should spend on their time with simple toys and friends outside for their growth.
To sum up, children accelerate their growth more to play with simple toys and friends outside than to devote to technology. I surely believe that they can make common sense for their future, boost their potential of evolution, and focus on plays to avoid complex rules.
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement It is difficult for teachers to be both popular liked by students and effective in helping students in learning 73
- Which of the following do you think is the best way for a student to make new friends join a sports team participating volunteer activities in a community traveling 70
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement The job has a greater effect on one s overall happiness than the social life does 90
- Doing which activity do you think can better help you strengthen the friendship between you and your friend having a good time together with your friend solving your friend s problem with him or her 67
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement In modern society parents should learn more from children than children learn from parents 88
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 200, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...t in bountiful circumstances of society so as to match and be recognized by other people...
^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... people who rely on many technologies. Finally, children devote on plays withou...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, finally, however, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, as to, for example, for instance, as a result, in my view, to begin with, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 15.1003584229 33% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 9.8082437276 61% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 13.8261648746 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 11.0286738351 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 37.0 43.0788530466 86% => OK
Preposition: 79.0 52.1666666667 151% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.0752688172 111% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2261.0 1977.66487455 114% => OK
No of words: 416.0 407.700716846 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.43509615385 4.8611393121 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.51620172871 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8434959897 2.67179642975 106% => OK
Unique words: 201.0 212.727598566 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.483173076923 0.524837075471 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 666.9 618.680645161 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 14.0 9.59856630824 146% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.94265232975 162% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.6003584229 121% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.1344086022 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 27.1678044752 48.9658058833 55% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 90.44 100.406767564 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.64 20.6045352989 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.32 5.45110844103 134% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 20.0 11.8709677419 168% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.85842293907 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.330684960821 0.236089414692 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.118894316599 0.076458572812 156% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0917852844123 0.0737576698707 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.23093105392 0.150856017488 153% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0483135412566 0.0645574589148 75% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 11.7677419355 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 58.1214874552 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.1575268817 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.98 10.9000537634 128% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.26 8.01818996416 103% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 86.8835125448 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.002688172 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.0537634409 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.