Although innovations such as video, computers, and the Internet seem to offer schools improved methods for instructing students, these technologies all too often distract from real learning.
Nowadays, techonology has acquired a pivotal role in the educational system almost everywhere. As a matter of fact, colleges, schools and universities make constant use of multimedia as aids to the learning process. While it is evident that these means can somewhat distract students, we must consider the many advantagies of this new system. All considered, in fact, we can easily maintain that it is not true that the distractions mentioned by the author of the above statement occur "too often".
First of all, we need to qualify the expression "real learning". It seems legit to deem "real learning" the process of deepening someone's own knowledge about a subject, thus basically learning new things by stuudying and making researches. By this view, it is incontrovertible that internet and,more generally, new technologies are a new instrument for real learning. Just consider Wikipedia: it is an all-comprehensive library of a plethora of subjectes, fundamentally keeping a substantial part of humans' knowledge about almost everything. How can anyone deny that, thanks to Wikipedia, we have now a huge and momentous chance to learn something about anything we need or desire to? At the same time, there are no important disadvantagious features in this important site and, in particular, no relevant distraction can be higlighted.
In the same way as Wikipedia, schools can now base the preparation of their students on a ton of other new methods. For instance, on platforms such as Youtube there is an ever-increasing number of channles that are leaded by pundits and that furnish studying material to students from all over the world. What is more, some universities, such as many Italian colleges with their long-lasting quality tradition, are now opening a considerable number of online courses that give distant students the chance to attend lessons despite the fact that they are far away from cities with universities. These are not distraction at all: on the contrary, they are a revolution in the teaching mechanism that is engendering a hugely wide community of students and researchers.
It can be argued that, notwithstanding these advantages, techonologies still fail to focus on the real sense of learning. For example, it is true that lessons based on Youtube videos and Wikipedia pages distract from the evidence that most of our knowledge is held in books. Or, again, online lessons cut off the contact between student and professor, that is a crucial part of the university experience. This is all undeniable, but it is not a thorough reasoning. All considered, isn't it true that these new tools are burgeoning the students community and the general level of culture in the world? To answer this question there are many noticable surveys that prove that culture is been delivered to many new people in the world, and it is all related to the distribution of technologies and, above all, of the Internet. This, it is clear, means that while these tools are somewhat a distraction for the students from real learning, they also have a positive effect to the diffusion of culture and of learning habits that cannot be argued.
To conlcude, it is true that technologies constitute a form of distraction for a number of reasons. Nontheless, it does not happen that often: the author holds only partially true. In fact, students are usually helped by videos, computers, and the Internet to achieve better education and can thus have advanced tools to study that do not confuse or distract them. On the contrary, real learning has been strenghten and deeply improved by techonology.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 315, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , more
...it is incontrovertible that internet and,more generally, new technologies are a new i...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 482, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...t a thorough reasoning. All considered, isnt it true that these new tools are burgeo...
^^^^
Line 7, column 490, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'trues'?
Suggestion: trues
...ough reasoning. All considered, isnt it true that these new tools are burgeoning the...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, so, still, thus, while, for example, for instance, in fact, in particular, such as, as a matter of fact, first of all, it is true, on the contrary, what is more, in the same way
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 32.0 19.5258426966 164% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 14.8657303371 128% => OK
Relative clauses : 22.0 11.3162921348 194% => OK
Pronoun: 57.0 33.0505617978 172% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 79.0 58.6224719101 135% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 12.9106741573 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3055.0 2235.4752809 137% => OK
No of words: 589.0 442.535393258 133% => OK
Chars per words: 5.18675721562 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.92639038232 4.55969084622 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.10310373165 2.79657885939 111% => OK
Unique words: 292.0 215.323595506 136% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.495755517827 0.4932671777 101% => OK
syllable_count: 955.8 704.065955056 136% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 16.0 6.24550561798 256% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 12.0 4.38483146067 274% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.2370786517 124% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.5654768232 60.3974514979 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.2 118.986275619 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.56 23.4991977007 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.96 5.21951772744 153% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.246180329435 0.243740707755 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0639588256204 0.0831039109588 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0439864709355 0.0758088955206 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.132816179186 0.150359130593 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0392728396089 0.0667264976115 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 14.1392134831 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.8420337079 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.12 12.1639044944 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.07 8.38706741573 108% => OK
difficult_words: 160.0 100.480337079 159% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.