In any field—business, politics, education, government—those in power should be required to step down after five years.
Should people with extraordinary leadership skills step down after a certain point? This question is indeed a debatable one,; to answer which, many parameters have to be taken into consideration. As per my view, it should not be a thumb rule for the leaders to step down after a stipulated time period even if they are meeting the expectations in their respective fields. There should be a provision for extending or reducing the tenure based on the effectiveness of a person.
Let me quote an example from the world of politics that will raise a potential question to the policy of leaders stepping down after serving for few years. John Buchanan was considered as an effective President of the USA, until the civil war broke out there. His inability in restoring the peace led him to step down from his position. He was succeeded by Abraham Lincoln, he continued to serve the country till his last breathe. People re-elected him, owing to his charisma and his capability of tackling various issues. This clearly indicates that if a person is worthy enough to continue in a role, it is not a wise step to replace him. In fact, by doing so we might hinder the path of a country's progress.
Conversely, it is also important to look at the other side of the coin too. New talent should also be given a chance to showcase their skills and prowess. Many students take professional courses in universities, among which computer science and technology is one of the favorite ones. Technology changes every now and then. If the dean of the computer department has been serving in his post for more than ten years, it is highly possible he might not be in sync with the latest trends in the technology. In such a scenario, one can think of giving a chance to a new talent who not only is aware of the most recent happenings in the field of computer science, but also has a better vision than the existing leader for the growth of students.
In sum, it is a grave mistake to ignore the young and dynamic minds by blindly continuing with the existing leaders. Change is the law of nature. Leadership should be changed, but on merit basis. If a leader is found to be not performing his job diligently, he should be definitely replaced. Policy of replacement will serve two purposes: it will enforce the leader to work efficiently, and secondly, new talent will not be wasted.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-23 | jason123 | 66 | view |
| 2019-12-21 | meghanajilla | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-08 | er.vprashant | 66 | view |
| 2019-10-03 | hj84 | 66 | view |
| 2019-10-03 | hj84 | 16 | view |
- Some people believe that government funding of the arts is necessary to ensure that the arts can flourish and be available to all people. Others believe that government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of the arts. 83
- Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could. 66
- Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state. 16
- To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In deve 63
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college 54
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 124, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , ;
... This question is indeed a debatable one,; to answer which, many parameters have t...
^^
Line 5, column 305, Rule ID: EVERY_NOW_AND_THEN[1]
Message: Use simply 'now and then'.
Suggestion: now and then
...f the favorite ones. Technology changes every now and then. If the dean of the computer department...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'conversely', 'if', 'look', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'then', 'in fact']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.212581344902 0.240241500013 88% => OK
Verbs: 0.162689804772 0.157235817809 103% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0737527114967 0.0880659088768 84% => OK
Adverbs: 0.060737527115 0.0497285424764 122% => OK
Pronouns: 0.056399132321 0.0444667217837 127% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.127982646421 0.12292977631 104% => OK
Participles: 0.0542299349241 0.0406280797675 133% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.67707459246 2.79330140395 96% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0325379609544 0.030933414821 105% => OK
Particles: 0.00650759219089 0.0016655270985 391% => OK
Determiners: 0.106290672451 0.0997080785238 107% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0281995661605 0.0249443105267 113% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00867678958785 0.0148568991511 58% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2372.0 2732.02544248 87% => OK
No of words: 419.0 452.878318584 93% => OK
Chars per words: 5.66109785203 6.0361032391 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52432199235 4.58838876751 99% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.329355608592 0.366273622748 90% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.224343675418 0.280924506359 80% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.167064439141 0.200843997647 83% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.107398568019 0.132149295362 81% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67707459246 2.79330140395 96% => OK
Unique words: 236.0 219.290929204 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.563245823389 0.48968727796 115% => OK
Word variations: 66.4809120658 55.4138127331 120% => OK
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6194690265 107% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0454545455 23.380412469 81% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.9400452011 59.4972553346 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.818181818 141.124799967 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0454545455 23.380412469 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.454545454545 0.674092028746 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.94800884956 81% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.21349557522 38% => OK
Readability: 41.4798220872 51.4728631049 81% => OK
Elegance: 1.41085271318 1.64882698954 86% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.205838737929 0.391690518653 53% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.0883945196204 0.123202303941 72% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0641694035331 0.077325440228 83% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.451041391746 0.547984918172 82% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.14723417746 0.149214159877 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0786457349548 0.161403998019 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0532351812542 0.0892212321368 60% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.378991669623 0.385218514788 98% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0531641657105 0.0692045440612 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.158978708373 0.275328986314 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0382359823117 0.0653680567796 58% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.4325221239 125% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.30420353982 38% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.88274336283 143% => OK
Positive topic words: 8.0 7.22455752212 111% => OK
Negative topic words: 0.0 3.66592920354 0% => More negative topic words wanted.
Neutral topic words: 2.0 2.70907079646 74% => OK
Total topic words: 10.0 13.5995575221 74% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.