Society should identify those children who have special talents and provide training for them at an early age to develop their talents.
When it comes to child prodigies, whether it is necessary and beneficial to provide training for them at an early age has long been a contentious debate. Advocates bring out successful examples such as Mozart to bolster their claim that geniuses should be identified as early as possible. On the other hand, people who oppose rigorously training potential children with special talents say that these measures may hamper the physical growth and social development of children. As far as I'm concerned, for children with obvious talents in math, science, or sports, society should provide training for them so that they can explore their potentials. However, these training should be optional and should not prevent children from engaging in other activities that is crucial for their age such as playing with their friends.
For math and science prodigies, it is beneficial that society provides some programs and education catered to their genius. For example, children with math genius might find elementary math classes boring and tedious. They might eventually lose their interests in math because they are not enlightened at an early age and their genius in math is wasted. Society can provide special courses in talented youth programs or camps so that these young prodigies can learn advanced knowledge that is more interesting to them than quotidian school work. They can also get to brainstorm with similar talents and this interaction can further bolster their potential.
Also, when it comes to talented youth in sports, society should also provide training for them at an early age to help them explore their potentials. Take NBA as an example. Almost all of the best players in the league started playing basketball at a young age. Since a great basketball player often possess many moves that are acquired through actual play and observation, players who started training and playing the sport early often boasts a rich set of skills that greatly outstrips those who started later. If society provides the necessary environment and training for these sport talents, their genius might be discovered and become world-class superstars. If these children come from poor backgrounds, this training would be more essential since their anticipated success might free them from poverty.
However, even though early training programs can be beneficial for young talents, these training should be optional should not hamper the physical and social development of children. For example, training programs can teach young sports talents necessary tricks and skills to succeed in a sport, but should not go to extremes where they use medicines to bolster the muscle development of children to facilitate acquiring of these skills. Also, these programs should also leave space for children to play with their friends and spend time with their families. After all, these training should only serve an encouraging purpose that allows children to discover their potentials.
In conclusion, I believe society should identify those children who have special talents and provide training for them at an early age to develop their talents, especially in fields such as math, science, and sports. However, these training should not hamper the social development of children and should be fully optional.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 488, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: I'm
...cial development of children. As far as Im concerned, for children with obvious ta...
^^
Line 5, column 182, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...entials. Take NBA as an example. Almost all of the best players in the league started play...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, may, so, after all, for example, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 26.0 12.4196629213 209% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 21.0 14.8657303371 141% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 11.3162921348 150% => OK
Pronoun: 56.0 33.0505617978 169% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 53.0 58.6224719101 90% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 12.9106741573 70% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2786.0 2235.4752809 125% => OK
No of words: 522.0 442.535393258 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.33716475096 5.05705443957 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.77988695657 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55324819582 2.79657885939 91% => OK
Unique words: 229.0 215.323595506 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.438697318008 0.4932671777 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 804.6 704.065955056 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 6.24550561798 176% => OK
Article: 0.0 4.99550561798 0% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 3.10617977528 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.3532975905 60.3974514979 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.636363636 118.986275619 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.7272727273 23.4991977007 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.45454545455 5.21951772744 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 18.0 10.2758426966 175% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.561330478247 0.243740707755 230% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.186433583801 0.0831039109588 224% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.141181227818 0.0758088955206 186% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.400737250557 0.150359130593 267% => Maybe some contents are duplicated.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.151097746498 0.0667264976115 226% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.6 14.1392134831 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.8420337079 116% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.1743820225 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.99 12.1639044944 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.92 8.38706741573 94% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 100.480337079 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => 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.