It is better to raise children in a multi-generational family than in a nuclear family. Do you agree or disagree?
It has been argued that children should be brought up in an extended family rather than in a small-size household. Although some people appear to prefer a nuclear family, the benefits of rearing children in a multi-generational one should be viewed as significant.
On the one hand, a multi-generational family brings a great deal of advantage. First, in that big family, children, especially infants, would receive a high-level of care from family members. For example, grandparents could take turns to look after the baby when its parents are swamped with work, which is a weight off its parent’s shoulders. Second, living in an extended family acts as an incentive for children to assimilate valuable life experience from their prior generations. Therefore, they are capable of looking at an issue from different angles.
On the other hand, children rearing in a multi-generational family might be fraught with pitfalls. First, when puberty, a period where a paradigm shift in mentality occurs, sets in for children, they are required to deal with generation gap. For instance, there is an abundance of contradicting perspectives between teenagers and their elders in terms of love; thereby resulting in family arguments which rarely occurs in a nuclear family. Second, the closeness among family members in an extended family is likely to be compromised. In fact, children may find it taxing to turn to someone whenever they encounter any difficulties including major changes in physical health, emotional well-being, which throws them in loneliness or even introversion.
In conclusion, a multi-generational family seems to be a more ideal environment than a nuclear family for raising children. However, family members should take steps to find workable solutions to tackle the generational conflicts.
(292 words)
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-05-23 | DatTranVan1811 | 78 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 221, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...le solutions to the generational issue. 291 words
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, look, may, second, so, therefore, well, for example, for instance, in conclusion, in fact, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 10.4138276553 19% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 12.0 24.0651302605 50% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 41.998997996 110% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1542.0 1615.20841683 95% => OK
No of words: 283.0 315.596192385 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.44876325088 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10153676581 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.23657551959 2.80592935109 115% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 176.041082164 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.597173144876 0.561755894193 106% => OK
syllable_count: 476.1 506.74238477 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.0654891163 49.4020404114 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.142857143 106.682146367 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.2142857143 20.7667163134 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.14285714286 7.06120827912 129% => 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 : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.344513279268 0.244688304435 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.12805597938 0.084324248473 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.114585591413 0.0667982634062 172% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.201459109897 0.151304729494 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.133115635642 0.056905535591 234% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 13.0946893788 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 50.2224549098 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.33 12.4159519038 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.87 8.58950901804 103% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 78.4519038076 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.