Claim: In any field—business, politics, education, government—those in power should step down after five years.
Reason: The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.
It is important that new leadership eventually supplants the old ones. The new ones are aquainted with up to date knowledge and they have the necessary hunger and enthusiasm to contribute. Also, allocating a specific timeline for someone's tenure stir ups the incumbent to do as much work as possible so that he/she will have a mark left at the end of the tenure. Therefore, I agree with the fact that there should be a system in which the new leadership replaces the old one.
As the world continuously changes, the required knowledge to perform tasks also change. People who had an antiquated education will not be able to do the tasks required by the present world. For example, someone who never had the education of computers will surely not be able to become a head in a present business company because computers have come to be an extremely imperative part in the business world today. While it is true that the old leaders can work to be up to date with the trades of the new world, keeping up with everything is merely not possible, and eventually there will be a need of someone who has been specifically prepared to face the new world challenges. Thus, it is critical that the new generation replaces the old one.
Keeping abreast of the newer things is particulary difficult for a long-time incumbent because they will not have the energy and desire required to do so. If someone remains in a position for a long time, the initail excitement of taking a position will soon die and then the necessary fervor to do exceptional tasks will never be there. When there is a regular change in the power, there will be a continuous influx of energy, and thus, there will be continuous effort put in to do great works. Along with it, if there is a specified stint for someone to do their job, they will be motivated to leave their mark during their stint. Hence, they will continue to work as much as they can within their specified period in power, and eventually, the overall period will be highly productive.
The only part of the claim that I tend to disagree with is the specific time period of five years that is mentioned in the claim. The reason provided does nothing to justify why the power should change specifically in 5 years, and I, too, do not see a reason why it should change exactly in 5 years. There can be positions where there are merley not enough qualified people who can take over the incumbents. In this case it can be detrimental by being stubborn about 5 years and replacing a qualified incumbent with someone unqualified. Hence, there should actually be a method to determine the rate at which a truly qualified individual is produced to lead a field and that field should apply that particular rate to change the poeple in power. Therefore, it should not be that we stick with the dogma of five years but rather there should be a time-period specified for each field according to the availability of competent individuals in that field.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 36, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
It is important that new leadership eventually supplants the old ones. The n...
^^
Line 1, column 378, Rule ID: AGREE_WITH_THE_FACT[1]
Message: Use simply 'agree that'.
Suggestion: agree that
... at the end of the tenure. Therefore, I agree with the fact that there should be a system in which the n...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 13, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ship replaces the old one. As the world continuously changes, the required knowl...
^^
Discourse Markers used:
['actually', 'also', 'but', 'hence', 'if', 'so', 'then', 'therefore', 'thus', 'while', 'for example', 'it is true']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.203866432337 0.240241500013 85% => OK
Verbs: 0.158172231986 0.157235817809 101% => OK
Adjectives: 0.091388400703 0.0880659088768 104% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0632688927944 0.0497285424764 127% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0351493848858 0.0444667217837 79% => OK
Prepositions: 0.112478031634 0.12292977631 91% => OK
Participles: 0.0316344463972 0.0406280797675 78% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.61360068048 2.79330140395 94% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0386643233743 0.030933414821 125% => OK
Particles: 0.00351493848858 0.0016655270985 211% => OK
Determiners: 0.112478031634 0.0997080785238 113% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0439367311072 0.0249443105267 176% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0193321616872 0.0148568991511 130% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2975.0 2732.02544248 109% => OK
No of words: 528.0 452.878318584 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.63446969697 6.0361032391 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.79356345386 4.58838876751 104% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.318181818182 0.366273622748 87% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.212121212121 0.280924506359 76% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.164772727273 0.200843997647 82% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.119318181818 0.132149295362 90% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61360068048 2.79330140395 94% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 219.290929204 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.441287878788 0.48968727796 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 51.1130183988 55.4138127331 92% => OK
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6194690265 97% => OK
Sentence length: 26.4 23.380412469 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.0631716602 59.4972553346 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 148.75 141.124799967 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.4 23.380412469 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.6 0.674092028746 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.94800884956 81% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.21349557522 58% => OK
Readability: 47.6121212121 51.4728631049 92% => OK
Elegance: 1.35616438356 1.64882698954 82% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.306789762267 0.391690518653 78% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.161731221782 0.123202303941 131% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0907751598183 0.077325440228 117% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.56944185325 0.547984918172 104% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.111246399106 0.149214159877 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.141015548777 0.161403998019 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0649160892753 0.0892212321368 73% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.458833651368 0.385218514788 119% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0651183503777 0.0692045440612 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.232721070355 0.275328986314 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0535961871013 0.0653680567796 82% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.4325221239 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.30420353982 94% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.88274336283 123% => OK
Positive topic words: 8.0 7.22455752212 111% => OK
Negative topic words: 3.0 3.66592920354 82% => OK
Neutral topic words: 5.0 2.70907079646 185% => OK
Total topic words: 16.0 13.5995575221 118% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.