The article discusses a fascinating topic pertaining to shortening of workweek and provides three reasons of support. However, the professor explains that cutting short the working days will not improve progress of company, economic growth and employees growth and opposes each of the author's reasons.
First, the reading passage discusses that the shortened workweek would increse company profits because employees would feel more rested and alert and hence would make less expensive errors in their works. In Contrast, the professor provides information that the company have to spend more on hiring new employees. This will excerbate the conditions as adding new employees leads to an increase in training costs and health benefit costs. Moreover, health benefit cost would be the same whether the employee works for 4 days or 5 days. He states that more employees will require more office spaces and more computers which adds to worsening of its effects. Clearly a disparity exists between the article and the evidence exhibited by the professor. As a result, we can safely assume that shortening of workweek will cost a lot to the companies which outweighs the profit obtained by making the employees rested.
Second, the article pushes forth the idea that hiring more staff for the same amount of work would not result in additional pay rolls costs. However, the classroom dicussion contends that by saying that many jobs would be available but, hiring new workers would be costly as discussed earlier. Indeed, company can force the workers to work overtime. This will increase the company's expectation from employees and they would want the workers to finish the job of 5days in 4 days. This would render no extra job and make the job unpleasant. Consequently, we can argue that indeed the claim made in reading is unsubstantiated and will make the job unpleasant.
Finally, the reading posits that shortening workweek will give employees extra time with their families or for pursuing their interests or leisure activities.The proessor refutes this point by explaining that this will reduce the quality of their life. We also learn that this will decrease their job stability and their prospects of advancement in their careers. Adding to that, they have greater chances of losing their jobs during recession. They might lose their chances of promotion because the company might prefer employees who work for five days for management position to ensure continuous coverage and supervision for the entire week their personal work but it will hamper their career growth and promotions.
In summary, while both the RC passage and calssroom discussion provie information with regards to shortening of workweek in companies, a significant amount of evidence supports that it is not beneficial for the company and the workers. Therefore, the RC passage fails to justify the claims towards the fact less working days will improve the quality of workers and their lives.
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government, industry , or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation, not competition. 54
- Originality does not mean thinking something that was never thought before, it means putting old ideas together in new ways. 50
- All nations should help support the development of a global university designed to engage the students in the process of solving the world's most persistent social problems. 50
- TPO-18 - Integrated Writing Task In the 1950s Torreya taxifoha, a type of evergreen tree once very common in the state of Florida, started to die out. No one is sure exactly what caused the decline, but chances are good that if nothing is done, Torreya wi 85
- We can learn much more from people whose views we share than the people whose views contradict our own ; disagreement can cause stress and inhibit learning. 16
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 158, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...g their interests or leisure activities.The proessor refutes this point by explaini...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, finally, first, hence, however, if, moreover, second, so, therefore, while, in addition, in contrast, in summary, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 25.0 5.04856512141 495% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 22.0 7.30242825607 301% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 42.0 22.412803532 187% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 30.3222958057 148% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2500.0 1373.03311258 182% => OK
No of words: 477.0 270.72406181 176% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.24109014675 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67336384929 4.04702891845 115% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59247693757 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 236.0 145.348785872 162% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.494758909853 0.540411800872 92% => OK
syllable_count: 731.7 419.366225166 174% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 3.25607064018 276% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 13.0662251656 161% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.296567617 49.2860985944 118% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.047619048 110.228320801 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.7142857143 21.698381199 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.14285714286 7.06452816374 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 4.33554083885 277% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.499708316049 0.272083759551 184% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.143820386481 0.0996497079465 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.103349300752 0.0662205650399 156% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.253278246239 0.162205337803 156% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.117789534149 0.0443174109184 266% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 13.3589403974 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.41 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.93 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 127.0 63.6247240618 200% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.