The writer of the issue contends that it would be enjoyable to have a job where one works on a three-day basis rather than engaging in a whole traditionally defined work-week. As in many cases, this issue will absorb both its own proponents and detractors. In what follows the main reasons adduced by the two of these groups will be discussed and there after my stance would be delineated.
The advocates of such plan may express a number of benefits involved with it including acquirement of plenty of spare time to be fully exploited in variety of ways. In this manner, those who have worked on three-day basis have some quality extra time to be spent with their dear family members or close friends, enjoy recreational and refreshing activities and the like. Nevertheless, they may tend to have a secondary job rather than enjoying and entertaining themselves which in turn could be financially reasonable.
The opponents, on the other side, seem to have some other reasons to believe otherwise. They might be concerned about ramifications of such a plan. In their perspective, this will decrease efficacy seriously. This regard, long hours of work may sound excruciating and loss of control or precision could be part of its adverse effects. Furthermore, both private and public sectors need a consistent management. Therefore, this plan would not do justice in higher positions since managers and supervisors should be in close contact with the tide of matters week round, albeit expect for weekends.
As for my own stance, I am much inclined to lodge myself somewhere between the two of these postures. Actually, one crucial factor which may not be unraveled to some individuals is that at least we have to consider what type of job herein is open for such a debate. Moreover, some jobs are not that much sensitive and aforementioned plan may seem quite viable. Take the case of janitors, they would find it appealing in order to find other jobs to increase their presumably lower income if they encounter these sorts of propositions. In contrast, some jobs or careers are by nature precarious and this plan may bring about catastrophic consequences. For instance, a pilot needs to work for a limited number of hours. Not to mention, hundreds of lives are at stake. By and large, I think only after keen consideration of associated aspects in each case, we are allowed to detract or praise the possible values of such shortened work weeks.
- People work because they need money to live. What are some other reasons that people work? Discuss one or more of these reasons. Use specific examples and details to support your answer. 54
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Parents today are more involved in their children s education than parents were in the past Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 90
- Some students prefer classes with open discussions between the professor and students and almost no lectures. Other students prefer classes with lectures and almost no discussions. 90
- When people need to complain about a product or poor service, some prefer to complain in writing and others prefer to complain in person. Which way do you prefer? Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 86
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The rules that societies today expect young people to follow and obey are too strict. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 76
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 348, Rule ID: EN_COMPOUNDS
Message: This word is normally spelled as one.
Suggestion: thereafter
...o of these groups will be discussed and there after my stance would be delineated. The a...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, furthermore, if, may, moreover, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, as for, at least, for instance, i think, in contrast, by and large, in many cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 15.1003584229 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 9.8082437276 184% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 13.8261648746 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.0286738351 63% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 33.0 43.0788530466 77% => OK
Preposition: 65.0 52.1666666667 125% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.0752688172 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2044.0 1977.66487455 103% => OK
No of words: 413.0 407.700716846 101% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94915254237 4.8611393121 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50803742585 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81126835752 2.67179642975 105% => OK
Unique words: 235.0 212.727598566 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.569007263923 0.524837075471 108% => OK
syllable_count: 640.8 618.680645161 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 9.59856630824 115% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.1344086022 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.931487563 48.9658058833 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.2 100.406767564 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.65 20.6045352989 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 5.45110844103 147% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 11.8709677419 42% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.85842293907 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.88709677419 184% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.129540202474 0.236089414692 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0338647326931 0.076458572812 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.033544741424 0.0737576698707 45% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0822912868899 0.150856017488 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0233726383337 0.0645574589148 36% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 11.7677419355 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 58.1214874552 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.1575268817 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.43 10.9000537634 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.76 8.01818996416 109% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 86.8835125448 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.002688172 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.0537634409 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.