Successful sports stars and glamorous film stars are a role model for youngsters. Do you support or not?
Recently, the phenomenon of stars emerging as role-models for children and its corresponding impacts has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that idolizing a megastar is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly constructive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that following in the footsteps of a successful individual can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, world-famous trailblazers can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that being inspired by a public figure, as well as relating to a celebrity’s personal struggles, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered the positive effect of admiring an Olympic athlete on a student’s athletic performance. Thus, beneficial ramifications of popular culture icons as an inspiration source apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of psychology, puberty might increase the consequences of looking up to someone. Moreover, fundamental aspects of shaping the future generations relate to this reality that the demerits of being influenced by a star pertain to setting higher goals for yourself. As a tangible example, a scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of having no role-models as a teenager is correlated negatively with academic performance. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of the youngsters being encouraged by idolizing their favorite public figures.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of the youth choosing a famous role-model far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of looking up to an athlete prove the significance of being motivated, but also pinpoint having discipline in life implications.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, hence, if, look, moreover, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.5418719212 133% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 6.10837438424 82% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 8.36945812808 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 20.9802955665 95% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 31.9359605911 132% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.75862068966 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1682.0 1207.87684729 139% => OK
No of words: 300.0 242.827586207 124% => OK
Chars per words: 5.60666666667 5.00649968141 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16179145029 3.92707691288 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.39464283836 2.71678728327 125% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 139.433497537 139% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.646666666667 0.580463131201 111% => OK
syllable_count: 544.5 379.143842365 144% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 2.0 1.56157635468 128% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.5024630542 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 45.2004793485 50.4703680194 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.166666667 104.977214359 134% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.0 20.9669160288 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.91666666667 7.25397266985 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 6.9802955665 129% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 2.91625615764 69% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.124870492727 0.242375264174 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0425835117186 0.0925447433944 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0612548921078 0.071462118173 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0768656046957 0.151781067708 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0512562181091 0.0609392437508 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.5 12.6369458128 138% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 29.18 53.1260098522 55% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 10.9458128079 141% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.55 11.5310837438 135% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.19 8.32886699507 134% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 55.0591133005 218% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.3980295567 115% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.5123152709 152% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 77.7777777778 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 70.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.