Do you agree or disagree? It is more enjoyable to have a job when you only work three days a week for long hours than to have a job when you work five days a week for shorter hours
For most people, they feel quite satisfied with their current jobs which offer them enough salary to pay their costs. However, some of them may want more. They might consider to have more flexiblity in work. Working longer hours each day for three days a week seems like a suitable option for them. On the contrary, having longer working hours is not without its own problems which I would like to discuss in the following two reasons.
First, longer working hours each day for three days a week can lead to a serious problem that there is no balance in your life. Some days you are exhausted from work while the other days you feel tired because you can’t rest well. For example, I used to work as a night shift technician in a chemical plant. I worked at night for three days a week and I had to sleep in the daytime. It was easy to fall asleep at the morning after my workdays. However, most of my colleges and I suffered from sleepiness during our days off because we had barely found a right time to go to bed. Since we didn’t rest well, we didn’t want to go out and have fun like those people who work in offices. Our biological clock were totally messed up and a lot of people resigned quickly. For me, there was no balance in my life while I was working that kind of job.
Second, working an special calendar reduces your opportunities for social activities with friends. The opportunities are based on the common spare time between your friends and you. Since your working time is totally different from that of you friends, it would be hard to find a proper time to go out together. When you want to call someone to have a drink after work, you may find they have already go home because it is too late. For instance, once I was working late in the evening round 11 pm. I was hungry and I called many friends to have dinner with me but they all refused, saying they were full and their family would be worried if they went out too late. So I felt disappointed and I realized that working longer had an negative effect on my social life.
In a nutshell, I would admit that working longer hours for three days a week isn’t a good choice for most of us. It not only harms our life balance but also limits your time for social life. We should all choose a regular time job to maintain a work-life balance in the future.
- Some people believe that the best way of learning about life is by listening to the advice of family and friends. Other people believe that the best way of learning about life is through personal experience. Compare the advantages of these two different w 70
- Do you agree or disagree? It is more enjoyable to have a job when you only work three days a week for long hours than to have a job when you work five days a week for shorter hours 70
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement All university students should be required to take basic science courses even if it is not the field of their study 95
- Do you agree or disagree? It is more enjoyable to have a job when you only work three days a week for long hours than to have a job when you work five days a week for shorter hours 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 17, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...ng that kind of job. Second, working an special calendar reduces your opportuni...
^^
Line 5, column 402, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'gone'.
Suggestion: gone
...er work, you may find they have already go home because it is too late. For instan...
^^
Line 5, column 729, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
... and I realized that working longer had an negative effect on my social life. I...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, second, so, well, while, for example, for instance, kind of, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 15.1003584229 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 9.8082437276 102% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 13.8261648746 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.0286738351 82% => OK
Pronoun: 61.0 43.0788530466 142% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 60.0 52.1666666667 115% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.0752688172 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1917.0 1977.66487455 97% => OK
No of words: 438.0 407.700716846 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.37671232877 4.8611393121 90% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.57476223824 4.48103885553 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.26021516459 2.67179642975 85% => OK
Unique words: 218.0 212.727598566 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.497716894977 0.524837075471 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 589.5 618.680645161 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.51630824373 86% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 9.59856630824 135% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.6003584229 117% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 30.1535134769 48.9658058833 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 79.875 100.406767564 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.25 20.6045352989 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.66666666667 5.45110844103 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.85842293907 181% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.412067044916 0.236089414692 175% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.119338225313 0.076458572812 156% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0948775928696 0.0737576698707 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.259950537197 0.150856017488 172% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0457152105678 0.0645574589148 71% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 8.3 11.7677419355 71% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 78.59 58.1214874552 135% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.8 10.1575268817 67% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 8.12 10.9000537634 74% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.76 8.01818996416 84% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 86.8835125448 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.002688172 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => OK
text_standard: 7.0 10.247311828 68% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
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: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.