As cities expanding, some people claim governments should look forward creating better networks of public transportation available for everyone rather than building more roads for vehicle owning population. What’s your opinion? Give some examples or experience to support.
Recently the phenomenon of creating better public transportation and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matters of expanding cities are highly beneficial, such an issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to conceive that building more roads can be a plus, and I will investigate that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, sophisticated networks of public transportation can provide the society with noticeable effects, which are rooted in the fact that merits, as well as advantages of expanding cities, are visible. According to my own experience, I performed an academic experiment that discovered the importance of efficient governments. Hence, beneficial ramifications of building standard roads are crucial.
From a scientific point of view, building more roads can supply the community with negative impacts, which are related to the reality that demerits of costly vehicles are remarkable. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by an elite university described an increased population. Thus, predicted outcomes of inefficient governments are noticeable.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of professional public transportation far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of an expanded metropolis prove the significance of building a road, but also pinpoint possible implications.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-01-12 | Yuli | 77 | view |
| 2023-01-12 | Yuli | 77 | view |
| 2022-11-04 | fereshteh.r | 85 | view |
| 2022-11-04 | fereshteh.r | 55 | view |
| 2022-11-04 | fereshteh.r | 88 | view |
- Large shopping malls are replacing small shops. What is your opinion on this? Do you think this is a good or bad change? 88
- Some universities deduct marks from students' works if given in late, what are your views and what action will you recommend 85
- Travelling to study is over-rated. We have brilliant scholars who studied locally. Is travel really necessary for tertiary studies? 88
- Parents should be held legally responsible for their children’s acts. What is your opinion? Support it with personal examples. 88
- It is important for children to study a film at school to learn literature. To what extent you agree? Give example. 88
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, if, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 6.10837438424 65% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 8.36945812808 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 20.9802955665 71% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 31.9359605911 85% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.75862068966 139% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1319.0 1207.87684729 109% => OK
No of words: 225.0 242.827586207 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.86222222222 5.00649968141 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.87298334621 3.92707691288 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.37499885688 2.71678728327 124% => OK
Unique words: 149.0 139.433497537 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.662222222222 0.580463131201 114% => OK
syllable_count: 417.6 379.143842365 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.57093596059 121% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.6157635468 65% => OK
Article: 0.0 1.56157635468 0% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.5024630542 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.9978019532 50.4703680194 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.909090909 104.977214359 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4545454545 20.9669160288 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 7.25397266985 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 6.9802955665 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 2.91625615764 69% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.167370893217 0.242375264174 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0559096592557 0.0925447433944 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0246966409438 0.071462118173 35% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0915397523095 0.151781067708 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0200398813419 0.0609392437508 33% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 12.6369458128 130% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 25.8 53.1260098522 49% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 10.9458128079 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.71 11.5310837438 145% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.08 8.32886699507 133% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 55.0591133005 167% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.3980295567 96% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.5123152709 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 72.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.