According to recent scientific studies, TV programs attract more attention of children than active or creative activities in the contemporary life than before. Various aspects of factors will have significant influence on the trend and we could take lots of measures to tackle the problem.
The phenomenon results from not only the more and more interesting and fascinating TV programs but also several harmful adjustments of family, community and government. To begin with, the tendency of converting joint families to nuclear ones, detaching kids from their cousins and grandparents. More seriously, China has implied one-child policy for a long period. As a result, Children don’t have playmates after school. The only thing he could do is sitting in the soft sofa, watching TV and eating junk food. As for community, the feeling of common belongings decreases sharply among the neighborhood in the big cities in these years. Many residents have no ideas about their neighbors. On the side of city planning, parents realize it’s difficult to find a safe and comfortable public area for children, which makes them lock their children in ‘safe’ homes.
Luckily, in face of the serious background, there are still a number of effective solutions to cope with the problem. Firstly, parents could allocate more time to company their children, such as playing games together, taking kids to museums or parks on the weekends or have a short trip to the countryside or mountains. Secondly, schools are supposed to open playgrounds or gyms to kids so that they can have fun with their classmates. Thirdly, the community could set up a residents’ committee, organizing activities or events. For instance, children can apply for being a volunteer to help old people in nursing homes or attend a chorus for local church.
After having discussed the most pertinent points about this issue, I’m convinced that not only parents but also schools, communities and governments could take actions to improve the condition with the unpredictive development and changes in our daily life.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, second, secondly, so, still, third, thirdly, as for, for instance, such as, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 13.1623246493 30% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 10.4138276553 173% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 7.30460921844 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 41.998997996 112% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1777.0 1615.20841683 110% => OK
No of words: 333.0 315.596192385 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.33633633634 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27180144563 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89867421801 2.80592935109 103% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 176.041082164 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.636636636637 0.561755894193 113% => OK
syllable_count: 530.1 506.74238477 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 5.43587174349 0% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.6048913347 49.4020404114 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.0625 106.682146367 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8125 20.7667163134 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.3125 7.06120827912 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => 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: 0.139368338513 0.244688304435 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0418794839229 0.084324248473 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0426509140608 0.0667982634062 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0825757943255 0.151304729494 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0538801371773 0.056905535591 95% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.0946893788 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 50.2224549098 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.69 12.4159519038 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.84 8.58950901804 115% => OK
difficult_words: 110.0 78.4519038076 140% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => 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.