Find the Issue (neutral state of the argument).
Write a cogent argument taking the opposite view of �chip Johnson�.
Cell phones are standard issue in the urban day pack of the 21st century, a modern necessity for our daily activities and duties. There isn�t a grocery store, coffee shop or U.S. interstate where someone isn�t chitchatting at a fierce pace. It�s talk, talk, talk, and most of the conversation has nothing to do with business.
And last week�s Federal Communications Commission ruling allowing people to transfer their home phone numbers to their cell phones means the handheld, wireless devices are likely to take another giant leap into our lives when the new rule takes effect next Monday.
Don�t fear, Ma Bell. I will not be one of the estimated 6 million Americans who will pull the cord on their land lines in the next year. I don�t even own a cell phone.
And if I can withstand the peer pressure, I never will.
My annoyance for the incessantly beeping communication devices is strictly personal: There are certain times, places and situations where I just don�t want to be reached, and don�t want to reach out.
For example, I don�t like driving and babbling endlessly about how it will take five minutes less than the last phone call to get where I�m going.
And although it may seem that everyone in the country, from senior citizens to grade-schoolers, is using wireless, some people have concerns about the proliferation of cell phones, concerns that speak to the quality of our lives � and our communications.
�What happens if you try to tell me a story and half of my mind is somewhere else?� asked Monisha Pusapathi, a psychology professor at the University of Utah who has done research on cell phone use.
Pusapathi�s research indicates that cell-phone conversations � almost always part of a multitasking effort � simply don�t contain the key elements needed to engage someone in a meaningful or even efficient conversation.
�The way we talk, we�re optimized for face-to-face conversations, and there are a whole bunch of signals that help us at every level,� Pusapathi said. �Distracted listeners don�t give those signals adequately, on time or with sufficient detail.
�They don�t do as good a job at providing those signals, and that makes speakers cut things short, get stuck on the significance statement and repeat things over and over again to emphasize their point,� she added.
In other words, cell-phone conversations can be downright inefficient. And sometimes dangerous.
In one case used in the Utah professor�s research, a cell-phone caller made the person on the other end of the line � who was driving � repeat what he was told, to prove he was listening, she said.
Her research partner, University of Utah Professor David Strayer, has conducted studies on cell-phone use by motorists that suggest that people�s eyes track only about half of what they would normally see while operating a motor vehicle and talking on a cell phone.
And risk-assessment studies, done at Harvard University and the Brookings Institution, that initially determined the economic benefit of cell-phone use while driving far outweighed the risks have been toned down in recent years, said Stayer.
Stayer said it was common for cell-phone users to disengage from their physical environments � while at the office, walking down the street or navigating a 2,000-pound SUV through rush-hour traffic � while talking on the phone.
And the prospect of 77 million cell-phone users across the nation answering every single call made to their home, office, checking fax transmissions and e-mail could present a significant danger on the highway, not to mention our collective sanity.
All of us have stood in line behind people who conduct a phone conversation at the same time they are trying to order a cup of coffee or make a store purchase.
Add to the current volume of insignificant phone calls, every call made to your home, and it�s pretty clear that we could soon have a large social problem on our hands.
If the FCC wants us to be inundated with wireless communication, the federal agency should at least include recommendations about how and when cell phones should or shouldn�t be used.
Barring that, perhaps political activists should organize moratoriums, and elected officials should set enforceable limits on cell-phone use.
Stores should enforce policies regarding wireless chitchatting in their businesses.
The adage that silence is golden and children should be seen and not heard (babbling on their own cell phones) is as good as dead these days.
Forget the sound of one hand clapping.
The best we can hope for is a moment of silence at services and events to honor the dead. But even then, you can bet that a spiffy ring tone will sound before that minute is over.
Custom essay writing services ESSAY-911.com. Buy essays online !
Just say Yes to cell phones 7.9 of 10 on the basis of 4475 Review.Related Custom Essay:
The Victorian Novel Jane Eyre has been considered a great work of
How Does Charlotte Bronte create sympathy for Jane in the first
two chapters of the novel?
The Victorian novel Jane Eyre has been considered a great work of
literature since it was published in the late 1840’s. It follows the
development of young Jane from being a girl to turning into a woman.
It was very important for Charlotte Bronte to make the novel
interesting and gripping right from the beginning as she had to get
the reader interested in the novel so the reader will want to read on.
Therefore I am going to be analysing the first two chapters to see
just how Charlotte Bronte gets her readers gripped to her novel.
The weather compares with Jane’s mood when she is hiding behind the
drapes in the lounge, as the weather is cold, dreary, misty and
cloudy. It is also stormy and wet. Jane’s mood at this moment is
symbolised just the same as the weather. She is cold as she has no one
to love her and her mind is probably cloudy because she has a lot of
mixed emotions that she doesn’t understand. Her feelings are also
stormy, just like the weather, as she probably has a lot of hatred
towards her cousins, especially towards John.
In the red room, the weather contributes to Jane’s feelings as the
howling wind scares her as it is dark and many young children are
scared of the dark. Also her Uncle, Mr Reeds, dead body was stored in
the red room where she was locked in. She probably thought that the
howling wind was her Uncles spirit coming to get her. This makes the
reader feel sympathy for Jane, as she is just a scared child.
Jane, to get away from everyone in the house including her annoying,
bullying cousin, John, likes to go into the lounge and sit on the
window seat and shut the curtains on all her worries. This shows us
that Jane thinks of her life like a prison that she cannot escape
from. It also shows us that Jane is very imaginative as she can read
books and think in her mind that she is somewhere else other than her
life sentence in her prison.
Charlotte Bronte uses adjectives and similes to describe the ‘red
room’ so it makes the reader feel and be able to imagine that they to
are in the red room. Also when describing the furniture she always
makes them seem bigger.
“Bed supported on the massive pillars”
“Pillows on the bed… snowy Marseilles”
This is good as we are reading seeing this story from Jane’s point of
view. We are seeing it in first narrative. At this point in the story
Jane is still a child and Charlotte Bronte has done well to describe
the furniture in such a way that it makes it sound like a child’s
view. Of course the furniture is going to seem big and overpowering to
a small child like Jane. This makes us the reader feel sympathetic to
Jane as feel for the small little girl all alone in a dark room with
The colour red symbolises danger. This would therefore scare Jane.
Also before Abbot and Bessie left the room, Abbot started to talk
about the devil. In many places the devil is linked in with the colour
red. With Abbot talking about the devil and telling her to repent her
sins as if the devil is coming, this would scare the child as the
colour red all around the room this would probably make Jane think
that the devil is actually coming to get her. This makes the reader
react with more sympathy for Jane as it makes the reader wonder how
any child can be put through this sort of fear knowingly.
In the red room, Jane’s uncle, Mr Reed had died. It makes us the
reader feel sorry for Jane as she is only a child and when the wind
blows she probably thinks her uncles ghost is coming back to haunt
Another way that the author, Charlotte Bronte, helps us to feel sorry
for Jane is through language. The type of archaic language used in the
novel, Jane Eyre, is a formal one that is typical of that era.
In this novel the children talk formally as if they were adults. Jane
does not swear in response when someone has hurt her as most adults in
Victorian times would when their children misbehaved tell them that
God is going to punish them that God is going to punish them and they
will go to hell.
Children in those days were thought to have been born with sin so they
would have to be taught and disciplined to be good. The adults thought
that children were naughty little things that should be seen and not
heard. The Reed children belittle Jane by calling her names.
“Dependent, you have no money, you ought to beg and not live here with
gentlemen’s children, wear clothes at are mama’s expense.”
Basically this may be interpreted as the children ridiculing Jane for
her poverty and dependence. To get away from the name calling Jane
hides behind the curtain. This makes us, the reader; feel sorry for
Jane because no child should be put through this type of bullying day
John Reed is a schoolboy of fourteen years of age. He is large and
stout like a dingy. He has wholesome skin, heavy limbs and large
extremities whereas Jane is a small plain girl of ten. The Reeds and
Abbot judge Jane by calling her dependent, and they also judge her
because they say that she isn’t like a normal child for her age. They
judge her because she knows too much for her age.
The structure of the story also plays a big part in how Charlotte
Bronte creates sympathy for Jane. The story opens on the first page
with someone telling us that they couldn’t go for a walk today because
of the weather. The details that are left out are that who is speaking
to us and telling us the story. This gets the reader interested in the
story as it makes the reader intrigued to find out who is this person
and what is going to happen next to them.
The first two chapters are both short for nineteenth century novels
but because they are short it makes you want to keep reading onto the
next chapters and also both of the first two chapters end on cliff
hangers so that will make you want to read on as well.
Drama and tension are built up with the long but sharp descriptions
used to describe Jane’s pain and anguish. Also there is a lot of drama
when Jane is in the red room. With the long sentences it helps to
impregnate an image of the story in your mind and the repetition helps
the reader to read more fluently.
In Victorian times, parents thought if their children were not beaten
they would become spoilt and naughty. Girls were treated as
second-class citizens and were not expected to go very far in life.
They were expected to become like wives and mothers when they grew up
and as children they were suppose to act like delicate, happy, quiet,
pretty little girls. As a modern reader I feel sorry for Jane, as I
know that she will not have a chance and choices in life that I know
that I will have when I grow up.
Charlotte Bronte and Jane are similar because they were both girls in
a time when women did not have much in the world to do except maybe
marry, be a governess or a maid.
Charlotte Bronte was influenced by other writers of her time such as
Charles Dickens who wrote about poor people and children. This was
unusual style of writing for that time period as most novels were
written about adults and rich people because these were the people who
funded the novels to be written.
I also think that Charlotte Bronte was influenced by the gothic
stories of her time as she uses that very theme intensely in chapter
two when she is talking about Jane in the red room.
This analysis of the first two chapters has uncovered a great deal of
exciting events, interesting characters and suspense. Considering
these chapters are relatively short for a Victorian novel Charlotte
Bronte has cramped a great deal of detail in them. She has used a
variety of techniques and language to get across sympathy for her main
character, that is Jane. I feel that I can say that after reading this
novel Charlotte Bronte has successfully put across sympathy for “Jane
Eyre” in the first two chapters of the novel.
"The Victorian Novel Jane Eyre." 123HelpMe.com. 24 Jul 2016
Much has been written about child rearing practices; the right way, the wrong way, the American way, the modern way. Frankly, child rearing practices change from culture to culture, from generation to generation and from social class to social class. What is perfectly acceptable in one culture or decade, may be seen as shocking in another. As American society becomes increasingly more global and less homogenized, understanding and accepting cultural differences in child rearing will become more important.Other People Are Reading
The generally accepted way in which children in a society are raised, constitutes its philosophical and social child rearing practice. These practices evolve. American society is both materialistic and increasingly concerned with children's safety; making common the recent practice of supplying even young children with cell phones. What was considered luxury is now deemed responsible parenting.Historical Perspective
From the 1600s through the Victorian age, it was thought that "a child should be seen and not heard." Child rearing practices were strict and focused on social good, not child welfare. In the 1920s the scientific method of child rearing was popularized by self-styled child development experts like Myrtle Meyer Eldred. Her syndicated newspaper column, "Your Baby and Mine," advised, among other things, that children be taught to "self-sooth;" left to cry it out in a crib and not held.
The post war boom created the nuclear family. A generation of children was showered with material goods as substitute for actual time and attention. By the 1970s, child development experts like Dr. Benjamin Spock advocated a relaxed disciplinarian style where children would find their own moral values and learn things in their own time. Many parents substituted the role of "friend" for their parental role.
Only in this latest generation have American men begun take a more equal role in child rearing.Cultural differences
Diverse cultural backgrounds reflect different child rearing practices. While American culture generally values and rears girls and boys equally, many cultures give preference to male children.
The American standard of one child/one bedroom, is a recent practice; promoted in an age of smaller families and perceived affluence. The practice is not common in other cultures. Historically, in all but the wealthiest homes, children shared not just bedrooms, but beds. Even today, Hispanic immigrant families believe that young children should sleep with siblings and/or parents. The practice, called "augusto," translates literally as "being relaxed."
Practices regarding children and money vary widely. Some American parents give children money, expecting nothing in return. Other parents give allowance, but only with established chores. Still others don't give allowances at all, but pay children for work they do for the family. American children generally use that money for whatever they want. Other cultures expect children who live at home, grown or not, to contribute to household expenses. But if that child or young adult needs financial help for something like schooling, the extended family comes to their aid, with no questions asked.Discipline
Personal child rearing practices are based in whether a parent believes human nature is inherently good, or inherently bad. A parent who believes his child by nature will do the wrong thing unless taught otherwise, may create an authoritarian, punitive environment with strict discipline. Another parent, believing that the child's human nature is inherently good, may create the opposite extreme; an outright permissive environment where anything goes. Parents who take the middle road value their child, but create an authoritative, but nurturing environment, where rules are enforced, but lessons are learned by encouragement and natural consequences.
According to Lifestyle: Child Rearing Practices, Rewards and Punishment, American parents are more likely than parents in other cultures to punish bad behavior, but overlook, or not praise, a child's good behavior. This creates, not just a family dynamic, but a culture, where children, get attention for being bad.Values and Attitudes
Children first learn the values and attitudes practiced in their home environment, then from schools and peers. One example: if parents decide to teach the value of work, they may encourage children to take summer jobs. But teenagers encourage employment because they want spending money or are saving for things like cars or college.
Depending upon a society's values, the education system of an entire country may support a child-rearing practice. For instance, in America, schools place more emphasis on individualism. In Japan, teachers place more emphasis on group-consciousness.
Below is an essay on "Not Seen And Not Heard" from Anti Essays, your source for research papers, essays, and term paper examples.
In the article, ‘Not seen and not heard – legal and social exclusion of young people’ (Bunion, 2004) suggests that we would learn ways of how young people are being excluded from public places.
The viewpoint being developed is how communities have a negative view on young people and are excluding them from public spaces and how police and communities are achieving this.
The author’s viewpoint of young people being excluded is supported by the following points.
The public are lead to believe that all young people are a threat. A biased survey (Sunday Mail 2004) showed that of the 2337 people surveyed, only 4.8% of them was under the age of 18 and 66% of the people surveyed had anybody in their household under the age of 16.
Police have been given broad powers when it comes to dealing with young people. For example they are able to ask them to either disperse or move along if they perceive them to be a threat to others (Summary Offences Act, 1953)
Police also have the power to remove anybody under the age of 15 who is without adult supervision from public places. (Parental Responsibility Bill, 2004).
She also tells us that certain types of not ‘youth friendly’ (Mozart and Kenny G) music being played in areas such as train stations and streets where youths are loitering to help deter them from forming and thus reducing any perceived threat.
After reading the article I would agree that young people are being unfairly excluded from public spaces such as train stations, shopping malls and streets. The author gives examples of how this is happening with police having broad powers to achieve this. Her argument that ‘being young is not a crime’ (Bunion, 2004) and thus all young people should not be treated as such and be included in the decision process.
While the free essays can give you inspiration for writing, they cannot be used 'as is' because they will not meet your assignment's requirements. If you are in a time crunch, then you need a custom written term paper on your subject (great expectatons)
Here you can hire an independent writer/researcher to custom write you an authentic essay to your specifications that will pass any plagiarism test (e.g. Turnitin). Waste no more time!
Estella Havisham: Most readers are appalled at the cold-hearted and cruel ways of Estella, but any criticism directed at her is largely undeserved. She was simply raised in a controlled.
The statement "Children should be seen and not heard," is an extreme. The statement itself, targets young children as being lesser human being than their elders and having thoughts irrelevant to society. In Dicken's "Great Expectations" it is evident that the adults of that era do not wish to hear anything Pip has to say and become very indignant if he dares to venture a thought on any matter, ask a question or speak out of turn. However, in Mrs. Joe's case, the situation is different. It is not only that children should be "seen and not heard" but adults as well. Mrs. Joe feels that her opinions are the only correct opinions, therefor, allowing neither Joe nor Pip to speak their minds. Pip narrates that "Joe Gergary and I(Pip) were brought up by hand"(pg. 8, chpt ). Although unintentional, Mrs. Joe is, in a way, holding both Pip and Joe on an equal level, refusing to hear either one of them, therefor not discriminating against Pip because of age. Although through her own naivete, Mrs. Joe becomes a somewhat fair character Dickens's writes about a dinner party being held at Mrs. Joe's house(chapter 4) where Pip says "I was not allowed to speak"(pg.25) when at a table surrounded by adults. The period in which this is written, assumes that one must become old before one has an opinion. I feel that "children should be seen and not heard," could be relevant to modern day society if it were changed to "people who are ignorant to the situation at hand should be see and not heard". If a person of any age is not well informed of a situation which they take a strong stand on, their opinions are
The rest of the paper is available free of charge to our registered users. The registration process just couldn't be easier. Log in or register now. It is all free!More College Papers
Great Expectations Charcters Great Expectations essay
Great Expectations-Charcters Characters in Great Expectations: Static or Dynamic? The characters in Great Expectations are the products of extreme characterization. Each personality type represented is in its extreme, as though to make a point to the reader. Overall, the lesser characters in Great
Great Expectations 6 essay
One of the essentials for human fulfillment is a mastery within and outside of oneself. This mastery is that of a secure emotional state. Many believe in order to fulfill this mastery, one must search for his/her true love. Some may experience the pain of the search; some may experience the joy o
Great Expectations 4 essay
Charles Dickens wrote Great Expectations in the 19th century. His main character, Pip, recieves money from a benefactor, but does not find out who it is until the end. The question Dickens may have tried to get across was, "do you believe money makes you happy?" Well, it depends on who you ask. It c
This essay is a response to Stanford's essay on intellectual vitality. I am rather unsure as to its answering of the question. I sure hope it does! All comments are greatly appreciated.
My country is home to a surfeit of stereotypes; women are to be demure and confined to the kitchen, children are to be seen and not heard, and sadly, science students DO NOT write. With globalisation came reforms. Reforms in our thought patterns that helped quell the pervasiveness of some of these stereotypes. Sadly though, it failed to expunge one - science students still don't write.
I loved writing but would never have considered myself a great writer. Although I had been called forward occasionally to play raconteur to my own pieces, it was never so often as to warrant any form of recognition in that respect. Moreover as a science student, harbouring writing tendencies was considered near heresy, so I dimmed my passion for words. I was therefore surprised when, in my final year, my high school English teacher proposed that I write a play on child labour to be included in her presentation to the Microsoft Partners in Learning Program.
The knowledge that she had defied tradition in asking this spurred me on. In that infinitesimal moment, she revived a monster. The miniature Ola Rotimi in me had found root, and like a tree fern, had established a mutualistic relationship with the Einstein within. The result? A Da Vinci of the sort. With the flame now rekindled, I worked myself tired daily; researching and drafting each scene as it came, each time revelling in the knowledge that each word was a step against stereotypes.
Watching my play being acted out was one of the highest points of my life, bringing me as much joy as any of my scientific displays. For a moment I envisioned myself as Shakespeare, sitting through the premier of "MACBETH." I smiled.
When at the end of the play I was announced as the playwright, I stole a glimpse at my physics teacher. He awarded me a nod of approval as though to say, "But alas, science students DO write." My play went on to win third best at the national level. And although I am no Shakespeare, I AM A SCIENCE STUDENT AND I WRITE.
Hello, your writing style is great and you handle several big "SAT" words well. However, this has to be one of the most conceited essays I have ever read in my 6+ years of reviewing admissions essays. Everything in this essay is about how great you are - how great your works are - how many awards you won. Also, I do not understand what you mean by science students do not write. That may be the norm in your culture, but for the reader at Stanford, that might be a foreign thought as it is to me. Because of that, you need to explain more the thought process behind that school of thinking. Intellectual vitality is about how learning excites you. It shouldn't be about you comparing yourself and works to already well established notables -AAO
Thanks Kevin for your critique. I must agree that it appears rather conceited. It is actually. So I revised it. I tried to change the bit about, "science students don't write" and took out the achievements. Further criticism will be gladly appreciated.
My country is home to a surfeit of stereotypes; women are to be demure and confined to the kitchen, children are to be seen and not heard, and sadly, science students ARE NOT literary writers;they are better suited as Engineers and Doctors. With globalisation came reforms. Reforms in our thought patterns that helped quell the pervasiveness of some of these stereotypes. Sadly though, it failed to expunge one - science students are not literary writers.
Writing had always been one of my greatest passions. The conjoining of words from different races to form the coherent tapestry called English astounded me. Even more astounding were the yarns of delightful literature that were intertwined in the mystery of English. Each read took me on a wild sojourn and elicited feelings for which I know no worldly description. Unfortunately though, what I possessed in passion, I lacked in skill. That I was a science student only went to worsen my plight as Literature was absent from my curriculum. Any attempt at writing therefore would have been both empty and treasonable.
However in my final year, after reading Ola Rotimi's "The Gods Are Not To Blame," I found myself unconsciously perusing through tomes on writing. Each tome held its own allure and provided wonderful insights into different literary styles. My love for the written word deepened and I found myself, a frequenter at my school's productions. Time had nurtured my passion into love and appreciation for a forbidding art. I was now an infidel, a taboo breaker.
When I opted to write a play in the February of my final year, I knew I would be giving myself away. But the joy of seeing my fellows journeying into the world I was to create, and the knowledge that I could invoke concealed passions like mine to revolt against the stereotype, spurred me one. In the end, after my play had been accepted and acted out, and my name had been given as the playwright's, I ventured a look in my comrades' faces. Their bemused faces mouthed the question, "He writes?" I smiled in recognition as though to say, "Yes I am a science student and I write."
Well done. This is an essay that still gets the point across in a well put together manner. You just have a few minor issues to fix(I ventured a look in at my comrades' faces) and this essay will certainly be Stanford worthy. -AAO
I loved the topic of this essay! I would definitely say go with the second one as it better, more humbly displays your passion. I read somewhere that for schools such as Stanford and the Ivies, writing an essay overburdened with accomplishments is never a good way to go as 90% of the applicants are all extremely accomplished.
There are just a few minor corrections. The comma in this sentence initially feels wrong to me: "My love for the written word deepened and I found myself, a frequenter at my school's productions." Are you saying that you found yourself to be frequenting your school's productions (without a comma) or that you found who you truly were, a frequenter at your school's productions (with a comma)? I am sorry if that is very confusing. I almost confused myself writing it, but I hope you can see the difference, if you did indeed mean the second one then leave the sentence exactly how it is; it's wonderful!
In this sentence, "Time had nurtured my passion into love and appreciation for a forbidding art." Do you mean to use "forbidden?" It sounds more natural to me.
And going off of that last thought, natural is a word that you definitely want to stress when you are writing. Though I think this essay is extremely high quality and Stanford worthy, one thing you may want to be careful about is overusing your vocabulary. If that is the natural way you speak then congratulations, I am impressed. Still, you do not want admissions officers to think that the thesaurus aided you in writing your essay. They always want to hear your voice. Some of the best essays I have read that got accepted by the likes of Harvard used intelligent language, but not Scripps Spelling Bee language.
Again, excellent essay! As I said before (and you made clear in this essay), your grasp of language is remarkable. I would be very appreciative if you could give your input on my newest essay!
Writing had always been one of my greatest passions.
yehhh. this piece of writing proves it :)
What a writing :), Do you really search synonym for every word and then write. For me a good writing is what we called "able to understand not only pro". Anyway I am impressed with the kind of word you are using. B/w what topic suggest "Science students don't write - Stanford's essay" is itself a irony.
the "battling stereotypes" theme is one of the most tired of all, but this is a great, refreshing take on it. I love the topic. The second version of the essay wins in my book for all the reasons stated above.
Submitted by mahyuni_harahap on Mon, 03/23/2015 - 01:41
Every human undergoes the growth from baby, toddler, teenager, and adult. It is my opinion that childhood is the most important period for people as the talent and creativity of someone can be seen at this time. It is true that children can achieve better results as school if they are able to enjoy their childhood nicely. In this essay, I am going to describe several reasons why I hold this view.
First of all, the development of humans for both of brain and physics is in the young age. It is the crucial period for children between 3 and 16 years old. It is widely held that it is a gold period as youth can easily achieve whatever they are studying. Furthermore, they always copy everything that either hear or see. For example, pupils are educated by repeating what their instructor saying in front if class, such as “aple”, they will say “aple”, etc. In addition, they usually ask something that is still and interesting for them and memorize it well. Therefore, childhood is an exceptionally time for human being.
Additionally, under pressure conditions can create a fear for younger as they are afraid to do anything to avoid a mistake. Eventually, they are diffident to express what is on their mind. For instance, it is well for young children to play in mud because it can develop their brain as they are curious of it. However, they are forbidden by their parents with the reasons that it is dirty and contains enormous germs. In fact, majority of children like playing muddy and extremely enjoy it. It can train their sensory as well as motorist to think critically. Finally, they are able to understand a subject at school well and obtain good achievement.
In conclusion, I strongly agree that children should be given a freedom to enjoy their childhood to achieve better achievements at school as it is a gold period for their development.
Submitted by essayE-rater on Mon, 03/23/2015 - 11:40
under pressure conditions can create a fear for younger
under pressure conditions it can create a fear for younger
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 6.5 out of 9
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 1 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 325 350
No. of Characters: 1491 1500
No. of Different Words: 175 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.246 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.588 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.523 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 100 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 76 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 48 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 28 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.056 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.905 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.611 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.29 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.461 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.045 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Children should be seen and not heardChildren in public have the potential to make your life that little bit harder
All children, when not properly trained, can be a real thorn in your side. And that's just when you're sitting in a restaurant, riding on a train, or shopping in a centre. It's true that babies cry, but this is natural, it excercises their lungs and vocal chords and therefore they can't be blamed. But brats that appear to revel in running up and down shouting in public places can make life difficult.
We were all children once. We just have to put up with these annoyances just like everything else in life. Kids have rights to do things and be free. To some extent all kids are loud and obnoxious and they eventually, hopefully, grow out of it, but if this behavior continues and the child is still out of control. One must wonder is it the childs fault or the parents?
Actually, it is believed when we're children we are disobedient to learn right from wrong and experience the meaning and understanding of responsibility. Some children who disobey learn quickly rigth from wrong, learning from mistakes and becoming a well behaved citizen; some children do not. It is all based upon how that child is raised up until they're an adult, and what experiences they endure.
Children should be seen and not heardThe most ridiculously ageist idea concievable
Children are pretty, they give off Oxy-tocin: a chemical that makes them likable. Seeing children is pleasant and makes people happy.
However, children should be told not to have public tantrums since that makes people unhappy, including the children themselves.
Well, beyond Logan’s Run, anyway. I remember when I was a kid, being told I should be seen and not heard made me want to be felt as well – in the face. And frankly, that sentiment hasn’t changed.
Children should be seen and not heardI agree!!
Children should be quiet in public, they may still be children but they have to learn at some stage in their lives; manners and social expectations. You don't see adults being noisy, messy and down right horrible whenever you go. On public transport it's inconsiderate to talk on your mobile and make everyone listen to your conversation with your friend, children need to learn to be quiet and respectful like everyone else.
Greetings fellow site mates. I am Professor Megan Leigh Johnston and I disagree that kids should be silent in public places. Some people really hate little ones but. WE WERE ALL THEM ONCE! If i recall when i was a kid (40 years ago), I can remember my parents who have recently died, shouted and screamed and swore. On public transport kids should have fun. Kids are actually very polite. If you think about trains trams and buses, a lot of kids give up there comfy seats for the fellow elderly!
Kids should be listened to full stop
Children should be seen and not heardHOWEVER, a child of2-10 years old cannot be blamed solely..
its after all the parents that are meant to teach them how to behave both privately and publicly; that must treat them well when they behave well, and punish them when they are out of turn. Swearing and screaming at a child is not the answer. Parents should be taught how to be parents before they teach their children how to be people.
My name is Tess Groody and I am a kid myself. You guys are selfish and senseless for blaming everything on kids. I have been exploring topics on this humblee site; Debatewise, and found alot of debates are based on kids and what a neuisense they are. I looked at the debate on the topic that children should not eat as much salt and sugar, and all the people who posted a comment were saying how kids are so obese these days. Have you looked at all the grown ups these days. jeez. Seriously you guys.
I'm in a poof because of all you people out there you are disrespectful to us.
Adults often have the stresses of the world on their shoulders, and the last thing they want is children screaming in their ears in public places (unless perhaps a park or a funfair/some children-only type place). I don't blame children solely, in fact I largely blame the parents. if a child of mine was screaming in public, or tearing about the place giving everyone around us headaches and disturbing the peace, I would quietly take my child to one side and try to get them interested in something else. It's mainly bad parenting that causes kids to run riot and annoy everyone! I don't have kids, partly by choice, so why should I have to listen to other peoples making a racket when I go out.
Children should be seen and not heardIt is a draconian idea that can stunt development
'Seen and not heard' is a Victorian ideal based on the idea that quiet, obedient children are superior in some sense. However, we should not be teaching young human beings to be completely submissive and to not express opinions, otherwise they will grow up as gutless, unconfrontational and easily controlled. Leaders are not usually the quiet ones and if we continue to tell children to be "seen and not heard" all we are doing is crippling their ability to grow up and be successful people.
Alright I've read both sides and I agree with some and disagree with some but I will try to humbly agree with the statement and this is why.
Firstly I feel some are taking the saying to a extreme. This is not needed. I'm always being told how well my children behave in public simply because nobody but the people at my table or by my cart can hear them. They are still asking questions and being curious. They are still behaving like normal children but they are not disrupting the meals and shopping experiences of others. You can teach your children to speak there minds in a controlled intelligent way when they're upset, as to avoid being gutless. Being seen and noticed and pleasing to the parents and the community does not mean raising spineless children, and when exactly did it become undesired to have polite soft spoken children around? Screaming yelling and other such behavior is frowned on when a fellow adult does it and if you raise your children to ignore these behaviors they will become loud poorly spoken grown ups. You can not get a steady job screaming and talking back to a future boss. You can't have passing grades arguing loudly every time you dislike your work. The world we live in is built around conforming to a ideal. I may not fully agree with the ideal but I do believe that firstly we survive and then we debate the means. Humans did not survive in the times of cave men by screaming and flipping out every time they got excited or angry and as "civilized" people nor should we.
Children should be seen and not heardWhat it really means!
The phrase children should be see and not heard was set in the victorian times now its the exact opposite. I am a child who is writing a speech on the topic: Young people should be seen and heard. What some of you dont realise is what it actually means. Before children were not allowed to stand up and voice their opionion, what they said did not matter in society. Adults did not care what children said. The children did not get opportunities to stand and say a speech like i am participating in now. This is the real meaning.
I know this and remember i am only a child.
No! That's not what it meant at all, it just meant that the children should mirror what their parents were. If their parents had taught them to be civilised and quiet and repect their elders and them then to go into polite company and be rude and interrupt etc. it doesn't reflect well on the parents does it.
The statement just means that they should sit quietly until they were spoken to - that they were able to "voice their opinion" if they were asked. Of course their opinion was valued, its just they were taught that they shouldn't feel their opinion was important over all others or that they had the right to interrupt etc. that's all.
I am also a child, and I know this.
Children should be seen and not heardListen
I am 15 years of age at the moment and though I am speaking for the negative in this instance, both sides have valid arguments. Kepp in mind here i am in high school and doing two university subjects, one in psychology and one in child psychology.
I watch my younger cousins today as they run around shopping centres, continuously ask for items and steadily get louder and louder as they are refused, the items. I watch as they scream at their mother, my aunt because they wont get what they want and I even see them hit each other and tease each other for no apparent reason, aslthough it might just be because the younger of the sisters is, well lets just say she takes after her mother. Children learn from their parents, my aunt yells and stomps around and glares when she doent get what she wants or when someone wont do what she wants, and her two daughters the younger one in paticullar copy this behavior to the point where i have had one of them come up and kick me because, i was looking after them when they wanted something. This is an example the affirmative should use, these are the kids that need to be told to shut up. But i have met many other kids in shopping centres who have been polite, courtious and reasonable. I was a very mature child when i was young, i was forced to mature quickly because of family circumstances but the point is if my mum would tell me to do something and i said no, the arguement either went two ways either she yelled or she persuded me to do it, when she told me to do something i wouldnt do it but when she asked and persuaded i would do it with out complaint, most young children are similar. If they are cowed into doing something they will have a tendency to push boundries and be rude unless commanded, these children quite often turn out to be delinquents and bullies in schools but also these are the ones that are most often misbehaving in shops. Children whos parents however distasteful many adults will find this, but children whos parents try to talk with them will have a tendency to push boundries, but they will know when they are going near the limit and back off like for example they will ask for something once and maybe ask again but they will know to stop there, these children generally turn out to be high acheiving students in school, then there are kids who walk all over their parents, these kids either misbehave silently or are very loud and rude. then their are abused or negleted kids, these kids generally are either overly polite or even worst such as the little kids who run around and bite people and beleive me it happens.
I have really not talked about the main topic so i apologise, but i was trying to give some insight into what modern child psychologists and myself have found through study and observation, but though i speak for the negative, thats only because there is not a grey area, kids who are told not to tlak in public are not menatlly healthy they can opften become, secluded and unsocial, but children that are given free run are well rude generally, this is based purely on sources that i have gathered for assignments, but children should be told to stick close to the parents but be allowed to speak within a reasonable margin of noise, but more to the point parents need to teach their kids this, if they can do that this out dated topic becomes redundant.