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.
Whatever group we may be a part of, wether it be part of a university, workplace and even as a citizen, there is always a leader who is looked up to for ideas and guidance. Some say that there should be a limit on the amount of time leaders in general should have providing that said guidance and ideas since it is the surest way to success. This is mostly true as no one extreme stance can be taken on this issue. There are two reasons for this claim and another important reason against this claim.
If leaders are not permitted to stay in power for more than five years, then it will be difficult for them to gain experience as a leader which could be required for success. For example, if an office manager is told to step down, then he may not be able to gain more experience as there is no guarantee that she/he will get that same position again. This could force that manager to find another job at say a fast food restaurant where many of the same principals learned from the office job do not apply at the resteraunt. Furthermore, since this manager did not gain much experience for fast food management, he/she will not be able to provide fresh ideas since five years could not be enough experience to be able to fully come up with the best ideas as a leader.
Lastly, if leaders are told to step down after five years the organization may loose an effective leader. For instance, if a school principal has managed to maintain good student morale, high standardized test scores, and great teachers for the past few years and was replaced by one who changed the curriculum and ended up undoing the success, it would have been in the school’s better interests to keep the original principal. Many times it is not that leader turnover will bring success, but it is that keeping those who get it right in the first place does.
In addition, the United States Congress could benefit from a term limit of five years as many regressive political ideas could be replaced by adding a leader with a fresh perspective. For example so many members of this congress vote on climate change bills that do not promote the use of greener energy. The use of nonrenewable resources is a very regressive idea that are held by those who have been essentially tenured with even tens of years of time in government. If newer candidates are to get elected, there is a higher chance that more progressive ideas will be introduced. If not, the next candidate may do so after their five year term is up. Five year term limits can bring more success to the country’s political ideologies.
In conclusion, there is no one extreme that can be taken to this issue since leaders can bring success in different ways with or without term limits.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 47, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'is'?
Suggestion: is
...er group we may be a part of, wether it be part of a university, workplace and eve...
^^
Line 5, column 80, Rule ID: LOOSE_LOSE[4]
Message: Did you mean 'lose' (= miss, waste, suffer the loss etc.)?
Suggestion: lose
...n after five years the organization may loose an effective leader. For instance, if a...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, if, lastly, look, may, so, then, for example, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, in general, in the first place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 33.0 19.5258426966 169% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 12.4196629213 169% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 11.3162921348 150% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 33.0505617978 109% => OK
Preposition: 63.0 58.6224719101 107% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2251.0 2235.4752809 101% => OK
No of words: 493.0 442.535393258 111% => OK
Chars per words: 4.56592292089 5.05705443957 90% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71206996034 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.49490262029 2.79657885939 89% => OK
Unique words: 232.0 215.323595506 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.470588235294 0.4932671777 95% => OK
syllable_count: 719.1 704.065955056 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.10617977528 225% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 23.0359550562 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.8378005774 60.3974514979 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.055555556 118.986275619 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.3888888889 23.4991977007 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.94444444444 5.21951772744 152% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.127634097673 0.243740707755 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0488204983653 0.0831039109588 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0422645394577 0.0758088955206 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0739087983588 0.150359130593 49% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0314140936448 0.0667264976115 47% => 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: 13.8 14.1392134831 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 48.8420337079 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 12.1743820225 103% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.52 12.1639044944 78% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.86 8.38706741573 94% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 100.480337079 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.2143820225 114% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.