In comtemporary society, where rarely is children’s development underestimated, it comes no surprise that the entertainment, an integral ingredient of rearing the desendant, has always amongst the top priorities of the families. A simple recognition of the argument leads our discussion to the controversial issue of how to entertain. Some adhere to the belief that the children should be given the freedom to choose the method, even though they are more than to give preference to the electronic product like computers. An alternative strategy competing with it is to amuse themselves with real stuffs such as toys or companions. I am inclined to concur with the later idea, and in the ensuing paragraph the rationale behind the statement will be further elaborated.
The foremost factor tipping the competive advantage from the former to the latter is the sense of responsibility. As we know, the virtual world provides the children with bountiful opportunies to dodge the punishment of making a mistake. For instance, provided that a player encounters an insurperable barrier posed by the game setting, he may resort to the tag-on service to defeat it without striking a blowing. On the other hand, it is impossible to skip a difficulty, a predicament and a dilemma to the ultimate triumph. Instead, you have no choice but to tackle the conumdrum with your own knowledge, talent and imagination, which undoubted lays a stepping stone to enhancing the sense of responsibility.
Another significant reasons that deserves attention is that being addicted to online games does more harm than good to the health, physically and psychologically. It is alleged by a substantial number of savants and researchers that staring at the screen, which is a ubiquitous phenomenon in playing computer games, will dramastically increase the risk of shortsightedness. Furthermore, those who indulge in the electronic devices conceivably suffer from the crippling impact of the deficiency of the interpersonal competence on account of the glaring fact that too much screen time will definitely take up your face-to-face communication time. It is the absence of intimates’ company that renders many children diffident. In the contrast, many multiplayer outdoor activity such as football and basketball, can not only strengthen their body in virtue of jumping and running in the field, but also cement their friendship in the cooperation.
With all factors taken into consideration, we can logically reach the conclusion that it is more advisable for children to have fun with the friends or toys instead of the high-techonology equipments for the sake of the sense of duty and health. It goes with saying that children’s all-round development in the long run demands them.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 32, Rule ID: ADVERB_WORD_ORDER[4]
Message: The adverb 'rarely' is usually put after the verb 'is'.
Suggestion: is rarely
In comtemporary society, where rarely is children's development underestima...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, if, may, so, then, as to, for instance, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 15.1003584229 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 9.8082437276 71% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 13.8261648746 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.0286738351 127% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 43.0788530466 74% => OK
Preposition: 67.0 52.1666666667 128% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 8.0752688172 211% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2348.0 1977.66487455 119% => OK
No of words: 437.0 407.700716846 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37299771167 4.8611393121 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.57214883401 4.48103885553 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.32095196279 2.67179642975 124% => OK
Unique words: 266.0 212.727598566 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.608695652174 0.524837075471 116% => OK
syllable_count: 729.0 618.680645161 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 9.59856630824 104% => OK
Article: 6.0 3.08781362007 194% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.6003584229 83% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 25.0 20.1344086022 124% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 56.8153690402 48.9658058833 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.117647059 100.406767564 138% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.7058823529 20.6045352989 125% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.29411764706 5.45110844103 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 11.8709677419 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.240705035743 0.236089414692 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.058756054407 0.076458572812 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0516066393055 0.0737576698707 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.131814874025 0.150856017488 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.058563853441 0.0645574589148 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.7 11.7677419355 142% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 58.1214874552 65% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 10.1575268817 140% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.16 10.9000537634 130% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.75 8.01818996416 122% => OK
difficult_words: 135.0 86.8835125448 155% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 10.002688172 150% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.0537634409 119% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.247311828 146% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.