Some parents offer their school-age children money for each high grade (mark) they get in school. Do you think this is a good idea?
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
From a broad perspective, in the current states of affais we face, in which childhood is accounted as the most critical period in the people's life, it is not far-fetched to presume that parents should behave appropriately with them in order to provide the best possible traning for them. However, which approach brings better consequences is considered as a contentious issue. There is a growing segment of people who content this idea that giving money as an encouragement fo the children's good scores is a good manner. I personally repudiate this idea, and in the ensuing paragraph, the rationale behindthis opinion will be furthr elaborated.
First and foremost, giving the monet hinder children to become independent. There is no denying the fact that the human requires a motivation for every single step which has been taken in his life. Also, money has been always amongst the most prevailing stimulus throughout the history, regardless of the age of people. Subsequently, needlesss to say that money usually work, but parenting is a duty beyond merely urging the children to do particular acitivity with the hope of obtaining the money. Having inspired the kids to study and get the good grades, parents should apply other ways rather than offering them money. As a metter of fact, children should learn that studying is their reposibility and they have to undertake its accountibility. Take a child who is accustomed to get money for his good mark at school. Admittedly, this habit gradually turns to a behavior and eventually he will not do anything without acquiring sifficient money for it. This monatory ppoint of view tiard the surroung world impede this child to go forward by relying on himself.
Another vital point which should be taken into consideration is that today's children are the adult of the future. It comes as no surprise that the common features of current children become the prevailing charactrsitics of the future society. Therefore, spreading a particualt trait in the school-age children will not restict to their contemporart damages. According to the latest research attributing to Dr. Kevin Rude, a prominent and well-respected professor in the Department of Phsychology at the University of Macquirie, 70% of kids' features in the first decade of their lives will constitute their future personality. This probe provides further legitimacy of this idea that giving the monatory view point to the children leads them to evaluate the circumstances based on its financial profits and this attitude and mindset will last for ever with them and bring irrecoverable damages to both the person and society.
To wrap it up, it seems more judicioud to say that giving money to children is the most unsuitable behaviour. Not only does this deed prevent the children from get involved in activities that do not have any profite for them but also will hurt him and its society in the future.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 135, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'peoples'' or 'people's'?
Suggestion: peoples'; people's
...nted as the most critical period in the peoples life, it is not far-fetched to presume ...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 769, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[4]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'accustomed to getting'.
Suggestion: accustomed to getting
...its accountibility. Take a child who is accustomed to get money for his good mark at school. Admi...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, so, therefore, well
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 15.1003584229 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 9.8082437276 102% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 13.8261648746 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.0286738351 145% => OK
Pronoun: 45.0 43.0788530466 104% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 52.1666666667 115% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.0752688172 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2443.0 1977.66487455 124% => OK
No of words: 480.0 407.700716846 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08958333333 4.8611393121 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68069463864 4.48103885553 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84621382888 2.67179642975 107% => OK
Unique words: 263.0 212.727598566 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.547916666667 0.524837075471 104% => OK
syllable_count: 757.8 618.680645161 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.994623655914 0% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.1344086022 119% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.6929156186 48.9658058833 130% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.15 100.406767564 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0 20.6045352989 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.5 5.45110844103 46% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => 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: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.262970610001 0.236089414692 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0764595008936 0.076458572812 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0549298828397 0.0737576698707 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.154446957324 0.150856017488 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.058193303082 0.0645574589148 90% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 11.7677419355 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 58.1214874552 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 10.1575268817 125% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.54 10.9000537634 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.3 8.01818996416 116% => OK
difficult_words: 136.0 86.8835125448 157% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.002688172 140% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.0537634409 115% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.247311828 127% => 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.