As machines have become more sophisticated, more and more jobs and tasks involving physical hard work can be done automatically. Do the positive effects of this trend outweigh the negative effects?
Physical jobs, which include a lot of strength, are now becoming less demanding and can be automatically processed by cutting-edge machines. This trend is still causing controversy over its impact on the industry, but I support the idea that it has more advantages than drawbacks.
On the one hand, this trend has evolutionary effects on the quality of jobs and working conditions today. In the past few years, workers used to have unsafe working conditions and used to lack crucial gadgets for work. However, in today’s time, due to the enhancement of machines, jobs are becoming less demanding, and with the help of modern technological equipment, production is becoming higher. Thus, what all workers do today is supervise machines performing tasks. Moreover, working conditions are much safer than in the past thanks to the improved appliances, which help prevent unpredictable accidents while working. In a fast-changing world, modern machines support workers with their workplace and the difficulties their demanding jobs cause.
On the other hand, it is argued that machines could lessen the number of jobs available for the unemployed. Thus, some people believe that if machines are responsible for 80% of our work duty in a factory, workers are likely to become jobless. Although machines make physical jobs less tiring for workers, they are likely to increase the percentage of unemployment. Generally, this trend’s drawback is not as challenging as we assume, considering its benefits.
In conclusion, although this trend still causes difficulty in modern life, I agree that its positive contributions outweigh its disadvantage.
- The graph below gives information from a 2008 report about energy consumption in the USA since 1980 with projections until 2030 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and making comparisons where relevant 61
- The table shows data about underground railway systems in six major cities with date opened kilometres of route and passenger numbers per year in millions Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features making comparisons where rele 73
- The diagram shows how rainwater is collected for the use of drinking water in an Australian town Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 61
- The diagram shows how rainwater is collected for the use of drinking water in an Australian town Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 61
- The diagram shows how rainwater is collected for the use of drinking water in an Australian town Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 80
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, moreover, so, still, thus, while, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 7.85571142285 25% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 41.998997996 74% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.3376753507 48% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1391.0 1615.20841683 86% => OK
No of words: 256.0 315.596192385 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.43359375 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0 4.20363070211 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.00905767651 2.80592935109 107% => OK
Unique words: 154.0 176.041082164 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.6015625 0.561755894193 107% => OK
syllable_count: 421.2 506.74238477 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => 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: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 26.8418555078 49.4020404114 54% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 107.0 106.682146367 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.6923076923 20.7667163134 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.46153846154 7.06120827912 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.265877729764 0.244688304435 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0811519353775 0.084324248473 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0426357002377 0.0667982634062 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.13881324257 0.151304729494 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0368856845088 0.056905535591 65% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.0946893788 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 50.2224549098 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.21 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.27 8.58950901804 108% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 78.4519038076 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.