The best leaders are those who encourage feedback from those they lead.
In everything from businesses to sports teams to politics and beyond, there are a variety of leaders in our world. This position is a vital one, and not one that everyone can fill. Those who lead are expected to have an advanced understanding of a certain subject, idea, etc. of which they are to utilize in order to lead those around them. It is wise for leaders to take feedback, from those that they lead, into consideration in order to evaluate their style of leadership and its effectiveness, as well as what their strengths and weaknesses might be. However, just because one encourages feedback does not ultimately make them a good leader.
Feedback in the form of constructive criticism is generally beneficial for leaders to take note of. Constructive criticism is given with the hope of bettering the leader and furthering the cause, whatever it may be, as a whole. When given the scenario of a basketball team, the coach would be considered the leader of a team of students, imparting knowledge of the game and of sportsmanship to the players. If the players feel that the coaching strategy being used is not successful, maybe the coach is leaving players in to long leading to fatigue and worsened play or he is not utilizing vital players, they should be free to express their concerns to the coach. By receiving feedback from the team, the coach should use this in order to make better decisions that make the team more successful.
On the other hand, some leaders may encourage feedback from those they are leading, but if they do nothing with that information to better themselves or others, the feedback is useless. It is up to the leader to evaluate the feedback they receive and decide what to do with it, whether their actions, leadership style, etc. must be changed for the betterment of everyone involved. For one to think of themselves as better than those they lead or above their advice and feedback could be a harmful mindset. An example of this can be taken from recent politics in which President Trump mocked environmental activist Greta Thunberg. Thunberg has become a voice for environmental action, urging world leaders to do more to combat climate change. As the President, he is supposed to be open to advice from his cohorts as well as the public. Whether one believes the messages she sends about the climate or not, it is important to consider others’ opinions who are offering advice for the betterment of our society, in this case. In ignoring the advice of the activist, the President is not giving her feedback proper consideration, potentially leading to consequences in the future.
Leaders are prevalent in all areas of society. Feedback and constructive criticisms are necessary in order to help leaders lead to their fullest potential and to the benefit of those whom they lead. While it is true that leaders should encourage feedback, this does not automatically make them a good leader. A good leader is determined based on what they do with that feedback, whether they use it to better themselves or they ignore it.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, may, so, well, while, as well as, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.5258426966 154% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 57.0 33.0505617978 172% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 80.0 58.6224719101 136% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 12.9106741573 46% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2557.0 2235.4752809 114% => OK
No of words: 524.0 442.535393258 118% => OK
Chars per words: 4.87977099237 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.7844588288 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76026512755 2.79657885939 99% => OK
Unique words: 242.0 215.323595506 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.461832061069 0.4932671777 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 794.7 704.065955056 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.38483146067 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.1881875212 60.3974514979 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.541666667 118.986275619 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8333333333 23.4991977007 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.375 5.21951772744 65% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.83258426966 166% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.416336148007 0.243740707755 171% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.125126625318 0.0831039109588 151% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.104264871084 0.0758088955206 138% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.301361791985 0.150359130593 200% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.11972249028 0.0667264976115 179% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 14.1392134831 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 48.8420337079 120% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.1743820225 85% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.02 12.1639044944 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.08 8.38706741573 96% => OK
difficult_words: 113.0 100.480337079 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 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: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 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.