One of the most challenge problems in modern society is to have the most up-to-date skills for workplace. For solving this problem, the government decides to give all adults over the age of 25 a training course to learn new skills. Do you think it is an effective way for government to spend its money?
Whether the government should give all adults a training course to learn new skill or not is widely discussed. Many people feel that the help from the government is necessary. However, a trend that has existed recently is that an increasing number of adults take additional lessons after working. And I strongly believe that it is not an effective way for the government to spend its money for the following reasons.
First of all, not everyone has interests and willingness to learn new things. To be concise, people usually feel exhausted after working all day. They just want to go home and take break as soon as possible. Take me for example, I am a dental assistant, and generally finish work at 11 PM. My job is to assist dentist for treating patients, so I have to walk around to acquire dental material for dentists and communicate with patients patiently which consumes a lot of energy. After work, I would stay on sofa and watch Korean dramas. I do not have any energy to learn new skills, and I am reluctant to use personal time to absorb knowledge for workplace.
Furthermore, giving all adults a course is not necessary. To be concise, people who want to improve themselves would spend money to take lessons automatically. For instance, my friend Cathy works in an accounting department and she has to communicate with international clients in English mail. Sometimes she would be corrected by her supervisor. Therefore she decides to attend the lecture called “How to Write Business English Mails.” Besides, holding classes means finding locations as classrooms, recruiting teachers, and purchasing equipment etc., which cost a lot of money and labor.
Admittedly, some people might consider it is more advantageous for the government to spend money on courses for all adults. Due to the help with the government, training course might be cheaper than what private companies would charge, which could increase people’s interest to participate. However, spending money for all adults can not solve the problem It still depends on personal willingness. In short, it is not an effective way for government to spend its money.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-15 | cathylin36 | 76 | view |
- People will spend less time on cooking food in twenty years. 70
- Do you think people in the past are more friendly than they are today 60
- Students are more interested in politics than they were in the past Agree Disagree 33
- In order to attract more tourists government should improve the safety by hiring more police or improve the appearance by improving the old buildings and streets 78
- Imagine that your city government has given permission for a major company to build a large factory near your neighborhood Do you think this is a good idea Why or why not Explain your position using specific reasons and examples 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 348, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...e would be corrected by her supervisor. Therefore she decides to attend the lecture calle...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, first, furthermore, however, so, still, therefore, as to, for example, for instance, in short, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 15.1003584229 79% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 9.8082437276 92% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 13.8261648746 80% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.0286738351 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 43.0788530466 58% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 52.1666666667 79% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.0752688172 111% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1805.0 1977.66487455 91% => OK
No of words: 356.0 407.700716846 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.0702247191 4.8611393121 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34372677135 4.48103885553 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85832378047 2.67179642975 107% => OK
Unique words: 201.0 212.727598566 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.564606741573 0.524837075471 108% => OK
syllable_count: 548.1 618.680645161 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.1344086022 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 49.8000753011 48.9658058833 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.25 100.406767564 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.8 20.6045352989 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.8 5.45110844103 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => 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: 0.267099717553 0.236089414692 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0833707496615 0.076458572812 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0760109014524 0.0737576698707 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.168031468258 0.150856017488 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0612895162165 0.0645574589148 95% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 11.7677419355 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 58.1214874552 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 10.1575268817 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.83 10.9000537634 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.69 8.01818996416 108% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 86.8835125448 109% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.002688172 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.0537634409 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
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: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.