tpo 01
The article discusses a fascinating topic pertaining to many employee requests about reducing the days of work from five days to four days and provides three reasons of support. However, the professor explains that it is not good idea and opposes each of the author’s reasons.
First, the reading passage discusses that in new option of working a four-day workweek, salary of employees will be reduced about 20 percent. In contrast, the professor provides information that authorities must spend more money even much more cost than the past. He states that in new system much more training, medical and health cost will be increased and with more employees, more offices and more computers will be certainly needed. Clearly a disparity exists between the article and the evidence exhibited by the professor. As a result, we can safely assume that in a four-day workweek, cost of system will be doubtlessly increased.
Second, the article pushes forth the idea that with accomplishing this idea, employees would feel more rested and alert and they would make fewer costly errors in their work. Moreover, rate of unemployment would be reduced with hiring new employees. However, the classroom discussion contends that by performing this plan, employees have to work more time and would raise expectation from them and they would experience unpleasant time when they have to do the same works in lower times. According to professor, over-employment will enhance more job and certainly former problems will be caused. Consequently, we can argue that indeed the claim made in reading is unsubstantiated and the four-day workweek idea is not rational.
Finally, the reading posits that the option of a four-day workweek improve quality of employees' lives when they are able to spend more time with their families. The professor refutes this point by explaining that diminishing the salaries to 80 percent than the past will certainly increase the level of risk in employees' lives and their quality of life would be reduced. They would harm their chances of advancing of their careers, too. We also learn that employees would lose their job because authorities might need five days employees.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, finally, first, however, if, moreover, second, so, in contrast, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 5.04856512141 396% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 13.0 7.30242825607 178% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 22.412803532 138% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 43.0 30.3222958057 142% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1850.0 1373.03311258 135% => OK
No of words: 362.0 270.72406181 134% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11049723757 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.36191444098 4.04702891845 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6056855887 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 185.0 145.348785872 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.511049723757 0.540411800872 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 548.1 419.366225166 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.05985851 49.2860985944 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.625 110.228320801 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.625 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.9375 7.06452816374 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.492052389297 0.272083759551 181% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.165102519291 0.0996497079465 166% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.103670693971 0.0662205650399 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.307611846921 0.162205337803 190% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.108951017882 0.0443174109184 246% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.3589403974 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.78 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 63.6247240618 146% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.