technology has made children less creative than they were in the past

Essay topics:

technology has made children less creative than they were in the past

Undoubtedly, technology is one of the most important aspects of our life. Technology is very useful and profitable for comfortable and modern life. Technology has numerous effects on children, which some of them are positive and some are negative for children. Personally, I rather agree with the statement.
First, technology has made children to be a consumer not a producer. Because of good status of socioeconomic of people, parents nowadays are able to provide a lot of things to their kids such as computer, cell phone, electrical cars and toys. Actually children have everything that they want to have. Especially in industrialized countries children always do not understand the meaning of need. In the past children touched this concept very well. They did not have expensive laptop or even cheap dull. In the past children made their own toys by themselves, which is rare today. My father told me, when he was a child in the village, children made toys by wood or clay, they worked together to make a car by clay. My father said that our car could move only few meters and then the car was broke down and we had to make the car again and again. One day we decided to improve our car and then we made a wooden car, which was better. In contrast today children have a lot of cars and they do not need to make their own toys by themselves, which can help to progress of creativity of children. Although having a luxury life is good, the creative idea born in the demanding conditions.
Second, Imitation is opposed with creativity and children with imitation lose their creativity. Technology is interesting and attracting for children and one of the most widely spread technology is the television. Television programs such as Cartoons and animations are highly attracting for children and children get massive influence from cartoon's heroes and celebrities, which was not in the past. Children like to imitate cartoon's characters speeches and acts. First decade of children’s life is vital period and in this time human character form, these imitations can lead children to be less creative. When I was a child we play football in the garden every day, there was a TV cartoon that name was The Soccer. That was about the children that played football and after a lot of practice and effort they enrolled into national football team of Japan and they win international cup. The cartoon was amazing and we loved to watch it. After watching we went to garden but we did not play football. Actually, we only imitate and repeat the scene of the cartoon but we never played football. After while we abandoned football and we started to learn Kong Fu because Panda was a Kong Fu master. Imitation is enemy of creativity because you only learn to copy other’s works and you do not focus on your own talent to be an innovator.
Nowadays, children are faced with negative influence of technology and one of the important is losing creativity. Technology teaches children that life is so comfort and everything is ready to use. It seems children like to use technology more than utilize of their own brain.

Votes
Average: 5.6 (1 vote)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2024-11-11 vuhongminh 61 view
2024-11-06 thuyan187 11 view
2024-09-10 phamkhuyen 61 view
2024-08-11 MEBC Class 61 view
2024-08-04 Ahmad_off 78 view

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 936, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[2]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: contrast,
...made a wooden car, which was better. In contrast today children have a lot of cars and t...
^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, if, second, so, then, well, while, in contrast, such as, in contrast to

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 13.1623246493 228% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 30.0 10.4138276553 288% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 13.0 7.30460921844 178% => OK
Pronoun: 48.0 24.0651302605 199% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 41.998997996 167% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2588.0 1615.20841683 160% => OK
No of words: 536.0 315.596192385 170% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.82835820896 5.12529762239 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.81161862636 4.20363070211 114% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69944054995 2.80592935109 96% => OK
Unique words: 261.0 176.041082164 148% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.486940298507 0.561755894193 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 814.5 506.74238477 161% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Interrogative: 2.0 0.384769539078 520% => Less interrogative sentences wanted.
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.10420841683 285% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 31.0 16.0721442886 193% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.7595377809 49.4020404114 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 83.4838709677 106.682146367 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.2903225806 20.7667163134 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.0 7.06120827912 42% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 20.0 8.67935871743 230% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.312686610905 0.244688304435 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0844948336008 0.084324248473 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0666549636315 0.0667982634062 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.190083217345 0.151304729494 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.040069014584 0.056905535591 70% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.0 13.0946893788 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 50.2224549098 125% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.3001002004 77% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.44 12.4159519038 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.66 8.58950901804 89% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 78.4519038076 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK

---------------------

Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.