Nowadays, people spend too much time at work to the extent that they hardly have time for their family. Discuss.
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:107%;mso-ascii-font-family:
Calibri;mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;mso-bidi-font-family:Calibri">Recently,
the phenomenon of a long time working and its corresponding impacts have
sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of business
endeavour is highly beneficial, such an issue is regarded thoroughly both
constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined
to believe that an optimum work-hours program can be plus and I will analyze
that throughout this essay.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:107%;mso-ascii-font-family:
Calibri;mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;mso-bidi-font-family:Calibri">From a
social standpoint, scheduled working and family time can provide the society
with some noticeable effect which rooted in the fact that the merits of full-time
jobs, as well as extension of working hours, are inextricably bound up.
According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an
academic experiment which discovered analytical outcomes of spending too much
hours at work and its defective effects of family life. Thus, beneficial
ramifications of both part-time jobs and inconsiderately treat with family
apparently can be seen.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:107%;mso-ascii-font-family:
Calibri;mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;mso-bidi-font-family:Calibri">Within the
realm of science, working rush hours might increase the consequence of exhausting,
low energy and inappropriate mood. Moreover, fundamental aspects of traditional
work timetable would relate to this reality that the demerits of unaffordable
cooperation pertain to boring long-hour working. As an example some scientific
research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside
of non-stop working is correlated negatively with weakness on job and family
relationships efficacy. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion
of short-time of family leisure.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:107%;mso-ascii-font-family:
Calibri;mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;mso-bidi-font-family:Calibri">To conclude,
while there are compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that
the benefits of the optimization of working hours and spending enough time with
family far weigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of a vibrant and happy
workplace prove the significance of family relationships. But also pin point
the long-term implications.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-02-16 | javanbakhttt@yahoo.com | 88 | view |
- Certain kinds of music promote learning in children life. Do you agree or disagree? 85
- Whether the design of the building will have a positive or negative impact on people’s life and work? 88
- Experience is a more effective way to teach, compared to books? Agree or disagree? 88
- Some people work for long hours and hard to achieve success and some give importance to free time for them. Give your opinion and discuss your views. 80
- In a cashless society, people use more credits. What are the advantages and disadvantages of this phenomenon? 85
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 15, column 74, Rule ID: MUCH_COUNTABLE[1]
Message: Use 'many' with countable nouns.
Suggestion: many
...red analytical outcomes of spending too much hours at work and its defective effect...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, hence, if, moreover, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.5418719212 85% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 8.36945812808 131% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 20.9802955665 91% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 31.9359605911 125% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.75862068966 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2490.0 1207.87684729 206% => Less number of characters wanted.
No of words: 308.0 242.827586207 127% => OK
Chars per words: 8.08441558442 5.00649968141 161% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18926351222 3.92707691288 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 11.8038231598 2.71678728327 434% => Word_Length_SD is high.
Unique words: 196.0 139.433497537 141% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.636363636364 0.580463131201 110% => OK
syllable_count: 708.3 379.143842365 187% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 2.3 1.57093596059 146% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.6157635468 108% => OK
Article: 3.0 1.56157635468 192% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.931034482759 107% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.65517241379 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 12.6551724138 79% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 30.0 20.5024630542 146% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 156.839695231 50.4703680194 311% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 249.0 104.977214359 237% => Less chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 30.8 20.9669160288 147% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.7 7.25397266985 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 33.0 4.12807881773 799% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 6.9802955665 72% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 2.75862068966 109% => OK
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: 0.137787673916 0.242375264174 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0588888350457 0.0925447433944 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0504415279273 0.071462118173 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0435232306666 0.151781067708 29% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0534729488707 0.0609392437508 88% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 32.0 12.6369458128 253% => Automated_readability_index is high.
flesch_reading_ease: -18.19 53.1260098522 -34% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 14.6 6.54236453202 223% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 23.3 10.9458128079 213% => Flesch kincaid grade is high.
coleman_liau_index: 30.18 11.5310837438 262% => Coleman_liau_index is high.
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.92 8.32886699507 131% => OK
difficult_words: 113.0 55.0591133005 205% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 20.5 9.94827586207 206% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 14.0 10.3980295567 135% => OK
text_standard: 21.0 10.5123152709 200% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum five paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 88.8888888889 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 80.0 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.