It has been claimed that workers over 50 are not responsive to rapidly changing ideas in the modern workplace and that for this reason younger workers are to be preferred. Do you agree or disagree with the statement?
In today's world of work, it is a widely held perception that older employees lack the capability of adopting to the new work patterns and thus companies ought to employ younger workers. I, however, hold a different opinion that elderlies still have a significant role to play in the contemporary workplaces. In this essay, I will endeavour to justify my point and draw a conclusion thereof.
First and foremost, it is scientifically proven that flexing to changes is a matter of personality type rather than age. In fact, old employees can be adroit to be responsive to the new working process as well as younger workers. My 57-year-old uncle who works in a local bank can be a good example for this case. Despite his old age, he can compete with his young collaegues one-handedly in a company where dramatic alterations frequently occur.
Secondly, mature workforce in the workplace could be an invaluable tool. Senior employees' long-year experiences and managerial skills will be considerably benigicial to teach young workers how to cope with different situations at work. For instance, the vast majority big companies are now striving to keep their old staff in the team in order to polish up the immature members of the job market.
Yet, there are some induviduals who claim that youngesters are more preferable in employment as they are with the most enthusiasism and energy. Nonetheless, these could not possibly be directod into a best use without experienced workers' practical tutorials.
In conclusion, it is obvious that younger workers are claimed to be more suitable to the new changes at work. Nevertheless, I assert that it is crucial for companies to have older staff to put the young employees into the right path.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017-01-30 | mohammedA25 | 73 | view |
| 2017-01-30 | mohammedA25 | 84 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 200, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[1]
Message: Use 'the' with the superlative.
Suggestion: the
...ese could not possibly be directod into a best use without experienced workers pr...
^
Line 9, column 174, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...that it is crucial for companies to have older staff to put the young employees i...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, nevertheless, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, still, thus, well, for instance, in conclusion, in fact, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 13.1623246493 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 24.0651302605 91% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 8.3376753507 36% => More nominalization wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1460.0 1615.20841683 90% => OK
No of words: 288.0 315.596192385 91% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06944444444 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11953428781 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94981167007 2.80592935109 105% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 176.041082164 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.607638888889 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 449.1 506.74238477 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.384769539078 0% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 31.1786327933 49.4020404114 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.285714286 106.682146367 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5714285714 20.7667163134 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.71428571429 7.06120827912 138% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 3.4128256513 176% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.184480128496 0.244688304435 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0620706813025 0.084324248473 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0523256832967 0.0667982634062 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.102439586158 0.151304729494 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.041016366649 0.056905535591 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 13.0946893788 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 50.2224549098 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 12.4159519038 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.18 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 78.4519038076 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => 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.