Technology has made children less creative than they were in the past
Today technology has a big influence on people`s lives. Many people believe that technology can improve children`s creativity and thinking. But I think that technology deteriorate children`s thinking and creativity and I will explain this in the following essay.
First of all, today children spent their free time playing on the mobile phone or on the computer. With virtual games, children do not improve their communication skills because they do not contact with other children. When I was little I used to play with my friends outside with a ball, seek and find and, also, we were making a castle from sand. But now children do not play outside. For example, I see children from my neighbors they are going out, sitting and playing on the phones without talking. I suggest parents buy children Legos and other creative games because through these games children become more creative, persistence, cooperative, learn to finish their obligations and overall strength their mental health.
Secondly, we do not need to make effort to find something because on the internet we can find almost everything what we want and need. In the past students for their assignments were made research in the books, newspapers etc. But today students do not make research for their assignment because they can find everything on the internet. For instance, my 12 years old cousin had homework to make research about one historical person. She found information on the internet and copied that without reading. When I asked her, who is that person and what he did, she did not the answer because she did not make a research about the topic. In this way, children are not interested in reading books or making research about something because they can find everything ready.
In conclusion, beside all advantages of technology if we do not use properly they can be useless. Because children are dependent on technology and do not make anything on their own they become less creative than children in the past were.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-10-08 | nguyenthaian0127 | 90 | view |
| 2023-08-21 | yuktapradeep | 60 | view |
| 2023-06-09 | theprasad | 66 | view |
| 2023-05-18 | fanassertive | 71 | view |
| 2023-05-18 | weiwei | 70 | view |
- Communal online encyclopedias represent one of the latest resources to be found on the Internet. They are in many respects like traditional printed encyclopedias collections of articles on various subjects. What is specific to these online encyclopedias, 73
- Summarize the main points in the lecture, and then explain how they cast doubt on the ideas in the reading passage. 73
- It is more important to keep your old friends than it is to make new friends 60
- dinosaurs endotherm 68
- Summarize the main points in the lecture, and then explain how they cast doubt on the ideas in the reading passage. 3
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 608, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[1]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'research'.
Suggestion: research
...not the answer because she did not make a research about the topic. In this way, children ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, second, secondly, so, for example, for instance, i think, in conclusion, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 15.1003584229 60% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 9.8082437276 82% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 13.8261648746 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.0286738351 63% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 40.0 43.0788530466 93% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 52.1666666667 79% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.0752688172 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1690.0 1977.66487455 85% => OK
No of words: 334.0 407.700716846 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.05988023952 4.8611393121 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27500489853 4.48103885553 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7324882736 2.67179642975 102% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 212.727598566 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.526946107784 0.524837075471 100% => OK
syllable_count: 508.5 618.680645161 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 0.0 3.08781362007 0% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6003584229 87% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.3210930538 48.9658058833 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.8888888889 100.406767564 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5555555556 20.6045352989 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.94444444444 5.45110844103 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 11.8709677419 76% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.88709677419 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.311532757064 0.236089414692 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.10392395935 0.076458572812 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.122763050364 0.0737576698707 166% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.2249865479 0.150856017488 149% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.140335316258 0.0645574589148 217% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 11.7677419355 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 58.1214874552 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 10.1575268817 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 10.9000537634 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.41 8.01818996416 92% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 86.8835125448 70% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.002688172 90% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
We are expecting: No. of Words: 350 while No. of Different Words: 200
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: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.