television has a positive impact on kids or has a negative impact on their behavior
In the last three decades, television has affected children's behaviors drastically. Some people believe that television has various drawbacks on children's attitudes; however, there is a substantial body of evidence claims that television could benefit children in many life aspects. From a personal perspective, the former point of view carries more weight given that TV influences children's behaviors, grades and health in a negative way. Below I will strive to explain my supporting points in more details.
The first and foremost point, since television has many violent and terrifying shows, it has a detrimental effect on children. Watching these shows could contribute to many aggressive behaviors, nightmares and fear from being harmed. A study done by The American Academy of Pediatrics found that children who watch television for a long time are more likely to commit an act of violence than those who watch less. Consequently, television has a bad effect on kids' manners.
Next, coupled with bad behaviors, low grades are another drawback of television. A vivid example that could be given to shed light on that developed countries, such as Canada and the Us have media technology that offers more ways to access TV contents through the internet, iPads or cell phones, which increase time spent watching television. Provided that students spend a long time in front of the TV, they could not focus on their studying, which negatively affects their academic performance. Furthermore, television discourages kids from reading, which is crucial to foster their brain function and promote their ability to think. Therefore, TV has a detrimental effect on young people's mental well-being.
Ultimately, children who are accustomed to watching television have low physical fitness. To put it in other words, recently, television has influenced kids' nutritional intake dramatically. Many junk food companies, such as McDonald's and Burger King, target kinds on their advertisements on television. Provided that children are routinely exposed to this kind of food, they could suffer from many diseases, such as juvenile diabetes and high blood pressure. Moreover, this food could add onto young people's weight and eventually lead to obesity. In addition to that, television could increase kids' sedentary lifestyle and take time away from healthy activities, such as soccer and swimming, which need more practice to be skillful. As a result, television has bad effects on children's health.
Taking everything into consideration, without a doubt, televIsion's drawbacks on kids' lives outwEIgh their benefits. Not only because it minimizes young people's academic performance, but also it harms their physical fitness. It suggested that parents control what their kids watch on TV and limit their screen time up to one or two hours daily.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 422, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a negative way" with adverb for "negative"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
... childrens behaviors, grades and health in a negative way. Below I will strive to explain my supp...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 191, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun junk seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'much junk', 'a good deal of junk'.
Suggestion: Much junk; A good deal of junk
...d kids nutritional intake dramatically. Many junk food companies, such as McDonalds and B...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 345, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...reen time up to one or two hours daily.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, furthermore, however, if, moreover, so, therefore, well, in addition, kind of, such as, as a result, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 15.1003584229 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 9.8082437276 92% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 13.8261648746 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 11.0286738351 163% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 43.0788530466 79% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 52.1666666667 98% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.0752688172 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2402.0 1977.66487455 121% => OK
No of words: 441.0 407.700716846 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.44671201814 4.8611393121 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.58257569496 4.48103885553 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86245232471 2.67179642975 107% => OK
Unique words: 253.0 212.727598566 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.573696145125 0.524837075471 109% => OK
syllable_count: 722.7 618.680645161 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 9.59856630824 52% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.6003584229 112% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.2199261907 48.9658058833 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.434782609 100.406767564 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.1739130435 20.6045352989 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.39130434783 5.45110844103 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 11.8709677419 51% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 3.85842293907 259% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.192946998966 0.236089414692 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0628997464913 0.076458572812 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0564496707081 0.0737576698707 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.11832205398 0.150856017488 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0334199224051 0.0645574589148 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 11.7677419355 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 58.1214874552 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.1575268817 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.33 10.9000537634 131% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.13 8.01818996416 114% => OK
difficult_words: 127.0 86.8835125448 146% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.002688172 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.