Some people believe that reading stories from e-books is better than watching TV or playing video games. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Being one of the most proliferated known child-minding issues of modern society is the effect of technology advancement on children in child-caring gatherings. Some people subscribe to the belief that reading e-books play a more substantial role than watching TV or playing virtual games. I, completely, disagree with the given statement on the basis of a number of compelling reasons.
Firstly, those who place a premium on virtual games point to the need for learning strategical planning for children. Simply put, they have been developed and strategically designed to be incorporated into the bulk of the entertainment industry. This may means that being faced with numerous difficult situations, the users are more likely to take judicious and down-to-earth decisions in real-life context later on. For example, encountering any dilemma and crisscross in no so distance future, allows players to show acumen and take decisive action to overcome difficulty. This in turn is very closely linked to triumph.
Secondly, with regard to the watching television, it is a pervasive medium’s invention able to have a profound effect on children through conveying motion and sight, thereby delivering educational programmes or making them purposeful more than reading e-books. To put it differently, providing children with visual courses or programmes, television is bound to lay the foundation for children to draw their aspiration in order to flourish their talents as much as possible. A good illustration of this is clearly delineated by watching athletes or professional musicians on TV that can potentially change and mould children’s attitude to take them as a positive role model. The majority of courses broadcasting on television do not incorporate into books either conventional or digital.
To conclude, I personally take the view that it is not absolutely imperative to read e-books for occupying their pastimes in exchange for watching TV or playing video games. Indeed, I agree, these latter activities can be judged as an effective means of offering virtual learning in the form of taking in some strategies and making children purposeful.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, if, may, second, secondly, so, for example, of course, with regard to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 41.998997996 121% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1830.0 1615.20841683 113% => OK
No of words: 335.0 315.596192385 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.46268656716 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27820116611 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.1271360265 2.80592935109 111% => OK
Unique words: 207.0 176.041082164 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.617910447761 0.561755894193 110% => OK
syllable_count: 564.3 506.74238477 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.9576456239 49.4020404114 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.714285714 106.682146367 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.9285714286 20.7667163134 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.07142857143 7.06120827912 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
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: 0.163271630356 0.244688304435 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0557648515237 0.084324248473 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0866642317396 0.0667982634062 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.109085853535 0.151304729494 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0699350632187 0.056905535591 123% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 13.0946893788 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 50.2224549098 79% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.68 12.4159519038 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.43 8.58950901804 121% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 78.4519038076 153% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.