Some people say that the internet has made a lot of information accessible, it is not important to learn facts related the history and science anymore. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Some people subscribe to the belief that easy access to the internet is completely sufficient for delivering information and facts. Although I consent to the positive implication of easy access to the internet, I opine that special attention needs to be paid for taking in more meticulous facts.
To commence with, the highly contingent reason is the issue of the ubiquity of the internet which plays a prominent role in time-management for those who are dependent on current information which firmly endorses the viewpoint that the internet makes information quite available. This may mean that heavy reliance on the information, people can accomplish more in less time. A good illustration of this is clearly delineated by qualification-seekers who tend to present a conducted research in the time frame briefly. In this sense, there is no need to devote entirely their time to study in libraries. This, in turn, is bound to lay a foundation to stick to their times and schedule.
However, the role of the internet in time-handling is not the only persuasive factor when it comes to facts. The internet is an unreliable source when disclosing the reality is concerned. Simply put, everyone can release anything they want while distorting reality with prejudice. Take the last dynasty of the imperial state of Iran as an example which there is a whole range of distortion and hidden angles if people will surf about this on the Internet. This is where the reference to the bibliography of history books might play a supplementary role in revealing the truth. The internet, therefore, is set to be misleading alone.
In addition to this, the internet is a potentially confusing source with references to science, meaning that the more dependence people possess on it, the higher possibility they make mistake. In other words, the internet is a mature skill which users should be able to discriminate between sources, sift information and marshal the facts. For example, in order to address an economic problem suggested by unqualified persons on the internet, people may are exposed themselves to a risky situation which could be a double-edged sword. This makes people vulnerable far more than ever.
To conclude, While acknowledging the substantial role of the internet in convenient access allowing users to stick their time, I would embrace that the internet can be judged as a supplementary resource while users use it logically with ability to diagnosis the right and wrong information imparted.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-10-26 | lethithuphuong | 84 | view |
| 2020-11-27 | el-naz | 64 | view |
- Some people prefer to spend their lives doing the same things and avoiding change. others, however, think that change is always a good thing. 78
- In many countries traditional food is being replaced by international fast food. This has negative effects on both families and societies. To what extend do you agree or disagree? 84
- In the past photography was used to real people and place however because of technology you can not trust what you see Is it a positive or negative development 64
- Living in a country where you have to speak a foreign language can cause serious social problems, as well as practical problems 73
- Nowadays, the Olympic Games play less important roles in the world in 21st century. Do you agree or disagree? 67
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 471, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[3]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'conducted research'.
Suggestion: conducted research
...alification-seekers who tend to present a conducted research in the time frame briefly. In this sens...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
briefly, however, if, may, so, therefore, while, for example, in addition, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 13.1623246493 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 16.0 7.30460921844 219% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 26.0 24.0651302605 108% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 41.998997996 138% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 8.3376753507 240% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2109.0 1615.20841683 131% => OK
No of words: 407.0 315.596192385 129% => OK
Chars per words: 5.18181818182 5.12529762239 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49157444576 4.20363070211 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03310758503 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 176.041082164 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.538083538084 0.561755894193 96% => OK
syllable_count: 675.0 506.74238477 133% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 8.0 2.52805611222 316% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 16.0721442886 112% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 68.2858009932 49.4020404114 138% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.166666667 106.682146367 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6111111111 20.7667163134 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.94444444444 7.06120827912 70% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => 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: 0.137177101377 0.244688304435 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0462777190688 0.084324248473 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0406634923078 0.0667982634062 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0866644536612 0.151304729494 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0280887463794 0.056905535591 49% => 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: 14.3 13.0946893788 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 50.2224549098 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.06 12.4159519038 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.15 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 78.4519038076 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 9.78957915832 158% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.