Technology has made children less creative than they were in the past. Do you agree or disagree? Use specific reasons and details to support your answer.
Technology, the reflection of human intelligence, has changed our lifestyle for decades. Some believe that technology distracts children's attention and negatively influences them. In fact, technology has made children more creative than before.
The accessibility of technology enables children to create their own ideas based on new equipment and facilities. Internet, the symbol of the third industrial revolution in human history, is crucial to make more materials accessible. In the past. kids surrounded the television to watch the famous TV series of creative painting lessons. In recent years. many video platforms like Youtube or Netflix inspire creators to post their videos online. Thus, children can watch these creativity-oriented courses on the web to cultivate their innovation ability. This approach greatly improves their chances of being educated to become more creative than kids in decades ago.
Moreover, technology offers more choices for children to show their creativity. Contemporarily, short videos prosper at an astonishing rate, and people can post any talk shows or fine comedies on tik tok. Thus, the forms of creativity are no longer limited to drawing or music. A talk show comedian, who usually needs many years to be popular, can become an Internet celebrity in a very short time and acquire hundreds of thousands of fans by disseminating works using Internet. At the same time the likes and comments would motivate creators to produce more and more quality works, which means that children could boost self-confidence and be aware of their progress through this mechanism.
Granted, some indicate that technology maybe deviates from the initial intention and makes children obsessed in video games. Temptations, however, exist at any time. Thirty years ago, the one distracts children was comics; twenty years ago, it was television. Technology, in fact, alters the form of temptation, instead of the distraction behavior. As long as parent guide their children to treat technology correctly and use it beneficially，this would not be a concern.
Although technology is viewed as a reason for distracting children from creation, it still allows them to be more creative. Not only does it help kids access to more creative oriented productions, but it also varies the form to inspire creativity.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-07-31 | raspberry_momo | 90 | view |
- Which of the following should the government to spend money to benefit city or region most A Providing more affordable housing B Decreasing air and water pollution C Attracting new businesses to the city or region 80
- Which of the following should the government to spend money to benefit city or region most A Providing more affordable housing B Decreasing air and water pollution C Attracting new businesses to the city or region 93
- Technology has made children less creative than they were in the past Do you agree or disagree Use specific reasons and details to support your answer 90
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Competition between friends usually negatively impacts friendships 76
- Do you agree or disagree with the statement Scientific discoveries should be shared globally and the government should not keep them as secrets 92
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 248, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Kids
...more materials accessible. In the past. kids surrounded the television to watch the ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 356, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Many
...tive painting lessons. In recent years. many video platforms like Youtube or Netflix...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, may, moreover, so, still, third, thus, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 15.1003584229 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 9.8082437276 61% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 13.8261648746 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 11.0286738351 45% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 43.0788530466 51% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 52.1666666667 88% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.0752688172 136% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1981.0 1977.66487455 100% => OK
No of words: 361.0 407.700716846 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.48753462604 4.8611393121 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.35889894354 4.48103885553 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01569572398 2.67179642975 113% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 212.727598566 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.606648199446 0.524837075471 116% => OK
syllable_count: 612.9 618.680645161 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 9.59856630824 31% => OK
Article: 6.0 3.08781362007 194% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.6003584229 112% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 20.1344086022 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.4822510512 48.9658058833 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.1304347826 100.406767564 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.6956521739 20.6045352989 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.04347826087 5.45110844103 56% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 11.8709677419 126% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
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: 0.154605935751 0.236089414692 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0529044562193 0.076458572812 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0599480278684 0.0737576698707 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.100120416127 0.150856017488 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0382260944388 0.0645574589148 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 11.7677419355 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.79 58.1214874552 82% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.1575268817 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.27 10.9000537634 131% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.54 8.01818996416 119% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 86.8835125448 136% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.002688172 60% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.0537634409 80% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.247311828 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.