Some parents forbid young children from owning smart phones (cell phones with Internet access), while others disagree and believe that they are important tools for keeping in touch. Which point of view do you think is better, and why?
Digital technology has become an integral part of today´s lifestyle. The widespread use of smartphones has changed the way people communicate and access information. The idea of children owning smartphones as a means of communication has appealed to some parents. Personally, I believe that children should not own mobile phones from early age. Phone limit face-to-face interactions and are immensely distracting for young children.
The begin with, phone indulgence deteriorates social and communication skills. Smartphones are a double-edge sword for young children. Although phones are useful tools to keep in contact with people, it can also limit face-to-face social interaction. For instance, children could rely mostly on texting instead of having conversations or spending time with their friends, which would negatively affect their ability to socialize and interact with people. Even when they having dinner with their family, children can focus too much on their phones and lose a good opportunity to strengthen their connections with their families and siblings. Furthermore, excessive use of mobile devices can lead children to become addicted and attached to their devices, boosting feelings of isolation and social anxiety. People learn key communication skills at a young age. If children lack social interactions while in development stage, it will deteriorate its capacity to effectively understand and communicate with people when growing up.
Secondly, the use of smartphones can be distracting while studying. While technology can be a useful teaching tool in the classroom, students can easily lose focus by frequently checking their phones. Easy access to many forms of entertainment can be tempting for many young children. Kids have not yet developed the understanding of what it is good or detrimental to them, which can lead to them getting addicted to their devices. For example, instead of focusing on learning and paying attention to their teachers while in class, young students get constantly distracted with social media and mobile games as they do not understand that these actions to them more harm than good. Not being able to draw limits would cause them to abuse the use of phones. Spending a lot of time playing games would definitely interfere with their learning process.
In conclusion, I strongly believe that children should first develop their interpersonal skills and learning essential knowledge before they get a smartphone. While technology brings many advantages, young children should focus on exploring and understanding the world and environment first, and not just spend time playing games on their phones.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...ely distracting for young children. The begin with, phone indulgence deteriorates soc...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 819, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to key'
Suggestion: to key
...lation and social anxiety. People learn key communication skills at a young age. If...
^^^
Line 5, column 507, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...n learning and paying attention to their teachers while in class, young students ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, if, second, secondly, so, then, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 15.1003584229 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 9.8082437276 163% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 13.8261648746 130% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.0286738351 63% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 43.0788530466 70% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 52.1666666667 104% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.0752688172 149% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2271.0 1977.66487455 115% => OK
No of words: 408.0 407.700716846 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.56617647059 4.8611393121 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49433085973 4.48103885553 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97938317383 2.67179642975 112% => OK
Unique words: 215.0 212.727598566 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.526960784314 0.524837075471 100% => OK
syllable_count: 683.1 618.680645161 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 9.59856630824 42% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.94265232975 40% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.3018071422 48.9658058833 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.227272727 100.406767564 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5454545455 20.6045352989 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.77272727273 5.45110844103 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => 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: 7.0 4.88709677419 143% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.209636762359 0.236089414692 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0708217792768 0.076458572812 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0495595938206 0.0737576698707 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.138316238612 0.150856017488 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0472666771519 0.0645574589148 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 11.7677419355 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 58.1214874552 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.1575268817 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.03 10.9000537634 138% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.79 8.01818996416 110% => OK
difficult_words: 110.0 86.8835125448 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.002688172 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => 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: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 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.