Nowadays, some employers think that formal academic qualifications are more important than life experience or personal qualities when they look for new employees. Why is in this case? Is a positive or negative development?
Nowadays, some employers think that formal academic qualifications are more important than life experience or personal qualities when they look for new employees. Why is in this case? Is a positive or negative development?
In today’s society, some recruiters suppose that formal academic diplomas are more important than life experience or good qualities. Reasons for this wary, and this has both negative and positive effects in equal measure.
There are several reasons why some employers favour employees who have formal academic qualifications over those have life experience or personal qualities. Firstly, recruiters think that candidates who have formal academic diplomas are provided in-depth knowledge about their career. For some occupations, employees must be trained for professional skills. For example, a candidate who in order to become a police is trained more specialized skills such as shooting experience at military school. Secondly, this trend helps employers to save their time. Employees who have formal academic qualifications know how to start working while others need training by employers. Employers must spend their time guiding candidates to do not have formal academic diplomas how to work properly.
Personally, I believe that this trend has both benefits and drawbacks. There are several benefits of this trend. Firstly, employers who are able to save time train employees to work. Secondly, employees who have formal academic qualifications are equipped with in-depth knowledge, employees who have formal academic are able to contribute to a company more than others by applying their knowledge. In contrast, there are negatives of this trend. Firstly, some university graduates lack of useful skills such as the communication skill. Then, employees face difficulties when they deal with customers, this leads to consequences like losing customers. Secondly, employees who lack of good personality traits may bring serious consequences to the company. For example, an employee who is dishonest may take bribes.
In conclusion, there are more reasons why some employers favour employees who have formal academic qualifications over those have life experience or personal qualities. Personally, I think that this trend has both benefits and drawbacks.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-07-11 | trần ngọc tuấn | 67 | view |
| 2023-11-27 | ophongcute@gmail.com | 84 | view |
| 2023-09-01 | Afdalah Harris | 73 | view |
| 2023-04-02 | anhminhbnvn1 | 78 | view |
| 2022-10-09 | linhdung01 | 50 | view |
- Nowadays, some employers think that formal academic qualifications are more important than life experience or personal qualities when they look for new employees. Why is in this case? Is a positive or negative development? 61
- In many countries, children are becoming overweight and unhealthy. Some people think that the government should have the responsibility. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 56
- In many countries, children are becoming overweight and unhealthy. Some people think that the government should have the responsibility. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 56
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 15, column 156, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...ve life experience or personal qualities . Firstly, recruiters think that candidat...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, if, look, may, second, secondly, so, while, for example, i think, in conclusion, in contrast, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 7.30460921844 233% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 24.0 24.0651302605 100% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 41.998997996 76% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1990.0 1615.20841683 123% => OK
No of words: 341.0 315.596192385 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.8357771261 5.12529762239 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29722995808 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95861500645 2.80592935109 105% => OK
Unique words: 153.0 176.041082164 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.448680351906 0.561755894193 80% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 608.4 506.74238477 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 16.0721442886 143% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 20.2975951904 69% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 47.9543733998 49.4020404114 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.5217391304 106.682146367 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.8260869565 20.7667163134 71% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.30434782609 7.06120827912 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 3.4128256513 234% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.461577668666 0.244688304435 189% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.147016458516 0.084324248473 174% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.159645397746 0.0667982634062 239% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.398545231119 0.151304729494 263% => Maybe some contents are duplicated.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.305442197227 0.056905535591 537% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 13.0946893788 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.34 50.2224549098 80% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.0 12.4159519038 129% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.62 8.58950901804 89% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 78.4519038076 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.6 10.1190380762 75% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 10.7795591182 74% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.