“People are getting so stupid these days!”
Technology will always mark the human experience, from the discovery of fire to the
implementation of nanotechnology. Given the history of the human race, there will be
no limit to the number of problems, both new and old, for us to tackle. There is no
need to retreat to a Luddite attitude to new things, but rather embrace a hopeful
posture to the possibilities that technology provides for new avenues of human
imagination.
Surrounded as we are by striding and strident automatons with cell phones glued to
their ears, PDA’s gripped in their palms, and omniscient, omnipresent CNN gleaming
in their eyeballs, it’s tempting to believe that technology has isolated and infantilized
us, essentally transforming us into dependent, conformist morons best equipped to
sideswip one another in our SUV’s.
Furthermore, hanging around with the younger, pre-commute generation, whom
tech-savviness seems to have rendered lethal, is even less reassuring. With “Teen
People” style trends shooting through the air from tiger-striped PDA to zebra-striped
PDA, and with the latest starlet gossip zipping from juicy Blackberry to teeny, turbocharged
cell phone, technology seems to support young people’s worst tendencies to
follow the crowd. Indeed, they have seemingly evolved into intergalactic conformity
police. After all, today’s tech-aided teens are, courtesy of authentic, hands-on video
games, literally trained to kill; courtesy of chat and instant text messaging, they have
their own language; they even have tiny cameras to efficiently photodocument your
fashion blunders! Is this adolescence, or paparazzi terrorist training camp?
With all this evidence, it’s easy to believe that tech trends and the incorporation
of technological wizardry into our everyday lives have served mostly to enforce
conformity, promote dependence, heighten comsumerism and materialism, and
generally create a culture that values self-absorption and personal entitlement over
cooperation and collaboration. However, I argue that we are merely in the inchoate
stages of learning to live with technology while still loving one another. After all, even
given the examples provided earlier in this essay, it seems clear that technology hasn’t
impaired our thinking and problem-solving capacities. Certainly it has incapacitated our
behavior and manners; certainly our values have taken a severe blow. However, we are
inarguably more efficient in our badness these days. We’re effective worker bees of
ineffectiveness!
If technology has so increased our senses of self-efficacy that we can become
veritable agents of the awful, virtual CEO’s of selfishness, certainly it can be beneficial.
Harnessed correctly, technology can improve our ability to think and act for ourselves.
The first challenge is to figure out how to provide technology users with some direlyneeded
direction.
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, however, if, so, still, then, while, after all, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.5258426966 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 14.8657303371 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 40.0 33.0505617978 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 63.0 58.6224719101 107% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2602.0 2235.4752809 116% => OK
No of words: 435.0 442.535393258 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.9816091954 5.05705443957 118% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56690854021 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.29394404629 2.79657885939 118% => OK
Unique words: 277.0 215.323595506 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.636781609195 0.4932671777 129% => OK
syllable_count: 792.9 704.065955056 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.2370786517 79% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 27.0 23.0359550562 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 102.923799938 60.3974514979 170% => OK
Chars per sentence: 162.625 118.986275619 137% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.1875 23.4991977007 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.875 5.21951772744 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 35.0 4.97078651685 704% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.119481493617 0.243740707755 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.045141288746 0.0831039109588 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0323816636432 0.0758088955206 43% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0290350492763 0.150359130593 19% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0305345138565 0.0667264976115 46% => 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: 20.3 14.1392134831 144% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 27.15 48.8420337079 56% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.92365168539 164% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.2 12.1743820225 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.7 12.1639044944 146% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.89 8.38706741573 130% => OK
difficult_words: 163.0 100.480337079 162% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.8971910112 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.2143820225 114% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
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.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, however, if, so, still, then, while, after all, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.5258426966 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 14.8657303371 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 40.0 33.0505617978 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 63.0 58.6224719101 107% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2602.0 2235.4752809 116% => OK
No of words: 435.0 442.535393258 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.9816091954 5.05705443957 118% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56690854021 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.29394404629 2.79657885939 118% => OK
Unique words: 277.0 215.323595506 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.636781609195 0.4932671777 129% => OK
syllable_count: 792.9 704.065955056 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.2370786517 79% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 27.0 23.0359550562 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 102.923799938 60.3974514979 170% => OK
Chars per sentence: 162.625 118.986275619 137% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.1875 23.4991977007 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.875 5.21951772744 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 35.0 4.97078651685 704% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.119481493617 0.243740707755 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.045141288746 0.0831039109588 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0323816636432 0.0758088955206 43% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0290350492763 0.150359130593 19% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0305345138565 0.0667264976115 46% => 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: 20.3 14.1392134831 144% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 27.15 48.8420337079 56% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.92365168539 164% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.2 12.1743820225 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.7 12.1639044944 146% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.89 8.38706741573 130% => OK
difficult_words: 163.0 100.480337079 162% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.8971910112 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.2143820225 114% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
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.