Claim: In any field—business, politics, education, government—those in power should step down after five years.Reason: The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership.

"Experience is the best teacher". If in government, industry, business, education, those are in power will step down after five years then general public which are served by them will not get advantage of their valuable experience. Also the new comers will have less knowledge than those who were previously in power. In accordance with this points, I am in disharmony with the issue statement that by revitalization we can achieve success. I will further elaborate my stand in ensuing paragraph.
First, if the people who come to lead after each five year will set their own rule as well as change the rules that were previous leaders have set. This changing process is not always beneficiary. For example, in India every time government changes, new rules come into existence and old rules are vanished out though they are beneficial to general public. In last fifteen years, the course of study science stream changed three times only due to government has been changed. There was no semester system in education before ten years then semester system was introduced by new government. Now after five years again semester system is removed by government. This type of change hinders the development of youth, causing slow development of country as well.
Second, the new comers might not be that efficient and well aware of system as well as they do not have that much experience. "Old is gold" cliche goes perfectly good for this kind of situations. By the time new comers understand the system and have some experience there is the time of step down. This cycle goes on and society will not be able to progress.
In contrast, some people might say that if the people in power will not step down then new generation will not have opportunity to grow. Another counter argument might be saying this not stepping down from power might cause the situation of monopoly. Resisting this argument I assert, for this flaws, that after every five year, for government, there should be election and, for other fields, there should be interview of those in power as well new comers.
In conclusion, only after judging who is capable of withholding the place one should take decision. If those are in power are still efficient to lead then there is no meaning of stepping them down though we can make strong upper limit for withholding the position and retirement.

Votes
Average: 7.5 (1 vote)
Essay Categories
GMAT/GRE Issue Task

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 150, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...er will step down after five years then general public which are served by them will not get a...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 243, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...advantage of their valuable experience. Also the new comers will have less knowledge...
^^^^
Line 1, column 348, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...previously in power. In accordance with this points, I am in disharmony with the iss...
^^^^
Line 2, column 341, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...ished out though they are beneficial to general public. In last fifteen years, the course of s...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 289, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
.... Resisting this argument I assert, for this flaws, that after every five year, for ...
^^^^
Line 4, column 361, Rule ID: SHOULD_BE_DO[1]
Message: Did you mean ''?
...e year, for government, there should be election and, for other fields, there should be ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 409, Rule ID: SHOULD_BE_DO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'interviewed'?
Suggestion: interviewed
... and, for other fields, there should be interview of those in power as well new comers. ...
^^^^^^^^^

Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'first', 'if', 'second', 'so', 'still', 'then', 'well', 'for example', 'in conclusion', 'in contrast', 'kind of', 'as well as']

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.24944812362 0.240241500013 104% => OK
Verbs: 0.150110375276 0.157235817809 95% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0706401766004 0.0880659088768 80% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0728476821192 0.0497285424764 146% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0264900662252 0.0444667217837 60% => OK
Prepositions: 0.136865342163 0.12292977631 111% => OK
Participles: 0.037527593819 0.0406280797675 92% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.61872460303 2.79330140395 94% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0132450331126 0.030933414821 43% => Some infinitives wanted.
Particles: 0.00883002207506 0.0016655270985 530% => OK
Determiners: 0.0772626931567 0.0997080785238 77% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.037527593819 0.0249443105267 150% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0110375275938 0.0148568991511 74% => OK

Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2374.0 2732.02544248 87% => OK
No of words: 401.0 452.878318584 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.92019950125 6.0361032391 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.47492842339 4.58838876751 98% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.311720698254 0.366273622748 85% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.231920199501 0.280924506359 83% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.167082294264 0.200843997647 83% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.124688279302 0.132149295362 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61872460303 2.79330140395 94% => OK
Unique words: 205.0 219.290929204 93% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.511221945137 0.48968727796 104% => OK
Word variations: 56.4911951636 55.4138127331 102% => OK
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6194690265 102% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0952380952 23.380412469 82% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.6330130726 59.4972553346 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.047619048 141.124799967 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0952380952 23.380412469 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.619047619048 0.674092028746 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.94800884956 101% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.21349557522 134% => OK
Readability: 42.2872580454 51.4728631049 82% => OK
Elegance: 1.69911504425 1.64882698954 103% => OK

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.314181426163 0.391690518653 80% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.0937870951654 0.123202303941 76% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0897301443732 0.077325440228 116% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.462056030313 0.547984918172 84% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.143898137463 0.149214159877 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.107673152432 0.161403998019 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0607163822455 0.0892212321368 68% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.299339026121 0.385218514788 78% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0548839617058 0.0692045440612 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.207387461267 0.275328986314 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.062660691534 0.0653680567796 96% => OK

Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.4325221239 105% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.30420353982 94% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88274336283 102% => OK
Positive topic words: 7.0 7.22455752212 97% => OK
Negative topic words: 4.0 3.66592920354 109% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 2.70907079646 111% => OK
Total topic words: 14.0 13.5995575221 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.