With the surge of media technology, today we are presented with a variety of options to choose our educational content from. Nevertheless, watching TV or movies is a passive form of absorbing educational content, in contrast to reading books. Thus, reading is more educational than watching movies or TV.
While it is true that the human brain is well adept at processing visual information, nonetheless, the passivity associated with the watching of TV cannot be denied. For example, we can all think of a time in our life, maybe even multiple times, when we have merely starred at the TV screen or computer monitor without actually paying any heed to the content. Rather we were consumed by our own thoughts. These distractions are not an anomaly when it comes to watching video content. The prime reason being: the level of engagement involved in watching TV. Whereas, when we are reading a book, we have to read it consciously and use our imagination along the way. This negates the possibility of passivity and thus help in gleaning educational content from the source in an active fashion.
Furthermore, reading involves the usage of auditory, olfactory, and imaginative abilities. Whereas, watching TV or movies involves only the visual ability of the brain. It has been scientifically verified that the more engagement of the nervous system we have with content, the higher its probability of retention. Thus, it is likely that a student reading a book will retain the content better than a student watching similar content over video sources, which can eventually lead to better grades and school performance for the student involved in reading.
Lastly, watching movies or TV opens up a wide variety of sources for distraction for any student. For instance, the TV can feature different content on different channels. Even if they are educational, a student is likely to be inundated with a plethora of options to choose from at a given time. This abundance of options will reduce his/her productivity and will be pernicious to maintaining an adequate level of focus, which is essential to understanding educational content. However, the student pursuing reading will have a limited option to navigate in the same book. Although, he/she might be tempted to read ahead new chapters, nonetheless, he/she will not likely to be bombarded with options as the student pursuing TV or movies for education.
In conclusion, reading may be a more useful learning tool for pupils.
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Students can learn as much by watching movies as they can learn by reading books 88
- The most important thing the government should do to improve health care is to clean the environment 90
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Students can learn as much by watching movies as they can learn by reading books 70
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Students can learn as much by watching movies as they can learn by reading books 90
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Students can learn as much by watching movies as they can learn by reading books 86
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 361, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Rather,
...ctually paying any heed to the content. Rather we were consumed by our own thoughts. T...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 769, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an active fashion" with adverb for "active"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...ing educational content from the source in an active fashion. Furthermore, reading involves the u...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, furthermore, however, if, lastly, may, nevertheless, nonetheless, so, thus, well, whereas, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion, in contrast, in contrast to, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 15.1003584229 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 9.8082437276 112% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 13.8261648746 80% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.0286738351 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 43.0788530466 70% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 52.1666666667 104% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.0752688172 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2085.0 1977.66487455 105% => OK
No of words: 407.0 407.700716846 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.12285012285 4.8611393121 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49157444576 4.48103885553 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88993836393 2.67179642975 108% => OK
Unique words: 205.0 212.727598566 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.503685503686 0.524837075471 96% => OK
syllable_count: 656.1 618.680645161 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 9.59856630824 94% => OK
Article: 6.0 3.08781362007 194% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.94265232975 61% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.8081125176 48.9658058833 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.2857142857 100.406767564 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.380952381 20.6045352989 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.0 5.45110844103 165% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 11.8709677419 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.88709677419 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.211744954635 0.236089414692 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0673824958259 0.076458572812 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0433617141563 0.0737576698707 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.130492541037 0.150856017488 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0282548120224 0.0645574589148 44% => 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: 12.4 11.7677419355 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 58.1214874552 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.1575268817 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 10.9000537634 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.69 8.01818996416 108% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 86.8835125448 122% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 10.002688172 120% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => 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.