The author recommended that business improvement depends on the sleeping time of workers. As a piece of evidence, author provides a recent study where it would be seen that less sleeping time helps to make a higher profit and faster growth. As a result, it seems plausible full of evidence, but careful scrutiny reveals its fault and ill-terminology.
First of all, the sample size is too small to make a decision. Only 300 male and female workers never represent the whole scenario of this sector. Perhaps, this association's worker might have take rest at daytime because for overtime duty at night so it is perfect to sleep only 6 hours at night. The author in this article highlight only one side but it still makes confusion whether there is any back-up for workers or not. It should be clarified properly to bolster this point.
Secondly, company progress not only depends on workers sleep time but also many other factors. Less sleep may save time as workers can do their job over-night and helpful to the company for more production. However, some other skill must be adopted by worker like working skill, knowledge about a specific task, experience, etc. regarding for progress. Author must be considered all of these issues under supervision to make a conclusion. Based on this specific manner shows a biased result which should not to follow.
Lastly, varieties of business exist in our society. Similar approach could be followed by a similar kind of business. Suppose, one person wants to begin a restaurant business, owner can follow another food-related business strategy to progress smoothly. But if this owner want to follow construction-site business strategy, this makes no scene. So, what type of business should follow author's mentioned method above, it should be clarified. Unfortunately, author makes a conclusion in this way that all business can prosper if they recruit those workers who sleep less than 6 hours per night. It sounds vague and illogical.
Finally, the author should make clear all this above issues to bolster his side. Further inquiry must be needed to terminate a logical conclusion. Only depend on one issue never clarify the main things as manipulate to reach the hidden factors.
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 368 350
No. of Characters: 1813 1500
No. of Different Words: 212 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.38 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.927 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.57 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 137 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 98 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 59 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 29 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 16 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.942 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.565 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.273 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.492 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.057 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 157, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...whole scenario of this sector. Perhaps, this associations worker might have take res...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, lastly, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, still, kind of, as a result, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 19.6327345309 51% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 55.5748502994 76% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 16.3942115768 30% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1868.0 2260.96107784 83% => OK
No of words: 368.0 441.139720559 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.07608695652 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37987740619 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6700882861 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 204.123752495 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.595108695652 0.468620217663 127% => OK
syllable_count: 578.7 705.55239521 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 22.8473053892 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.9440028236 57.8364921388 60% => OK
Chars per sentence: 77.8333333333 119.503703932 65% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.3333333333 23.324526521 66% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.29166666667 5.70786347227 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.104073406722 0.218282227539 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0277769637935 0.0743258471296 37% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0405806508066 0.0701772020484 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0585724904563 0.128457276422 46% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0254903926308 0.0628817314937 41% => 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: 10.2 14.3799401198 71% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 48.3550499002 116% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.197005988 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.59 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.46 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 98.500998004 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 11.1389221557 72% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.9071856287 67% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.