The advancement of Internet technology means people do not need to travel to foreign countries to understand how people in other places live. To what extent do you agree or disagree.
The tremendous growth of Internet has guaranteed human’s global understanding. While some people believe in the feasiblity of easy adaption to a brand new life in other nations thanks to the Internet, others do not. I advocate the latter and I will discuss it in the passage below.
In the first place, the actual experience is the one that matters. To put it another way, each country has its own feature that cannot be explored via virtual websites and pages. The Internet merely provides readers with information rather than engage them in the authentic situation. It opens up a scenario of a splendid life, leaving them wallow in their own dreams and ambitions. For instance, a newly-graduated student from high school may be overwhemled with a hostile environment when it comes to studying abroad, which is flatly contradict to what he/she has seen on the Internet.
Second of all, misinformation on the Internet can prompt catastrophic results. There being a substantial number of websites increase the risk of accessing to unsecured ones. Misled instructions from these websites may turn out to be a lethal weapon as it can cause misunderstanding and eventually result in conflicts. For example, the ‘OK’ sign that we use to express agreement is deeply offensive in Brazil. Such actions should be avoided by all means if one person is not knowledgeable enough.
In short, the overreliance on the Internet in exploring lives in other countries is irrelevant. Virtual users should gather their wits and ask a consultant for help it they desire to travel abroad some days.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 25, Rule ID: ACTUAL_EXPERIENCE[1]
Message: Use simply 'experience'.
Suggestion: experience
...ssage below. In the first place, the actual experience is the one that matters. To put it anot...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 537, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'contradicted'.
Suggestion: contradicted
...mes to studying abroad, which is flatly contradict to what he/she has seen on the Internet...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 354, Rule ID: USE_TO_VERB[1]
Message: Did you mean 'used'?
Suggestion: used
...cts. For example, the ‘OK’ sign that we use to express agreement is deeply offensiv...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, may, second, so, then, while, for example, for instance, in short, in the first place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 41.998997996 88% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1333.0 1615.20841683 83% => OK
No of words: 261.0 315.596192385 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.10727969349 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0193898071 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96676936549 2.80592935109 106% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 176.041082164 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.666666666667 0.561755894193 119% => OK
syllable_count: 407.7 506.74238477 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.1695120766 49.4020404114 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.8666666667 106.682146367 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.4 20.7667163134 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.4 7.06120827912 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.149517340702 0.244688304435 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.042366241057 0.084324248473 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0573173442189 0.0667982634062 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0898802739787 0.151304729494 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0528630740173 0.056905535591 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 13.0946893788 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 50.2224549098 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.3001002004 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.06 12.4159519038 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.56 8.58950901804 111% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 78.4519038076 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 9.78957915832 66% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => 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.