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.
Giving new life to fields like, business, politics, education are very much necessary as it is important to be parallel with the rest of the world. However, the claim that, to be successful, every field must undergo a change in leadership every five years is partially true. The reason is only strong enough, for the claim to be agreed conditionally.
Change is inevitable part of life. All fields will undergo a change once in a while, as change is important to keep the field alive and competitive. In contrast, very frequent changes to a particular field may have negative consequences instead of bringing good fortune. So, it is important to keep both change and consistency in mind before making any reformation. We all need change in system, but not as frequent as five years. To bring drastic changes, that surely takes any field to the door of success, is time consuming. Lot of planning and analyses should be done in advance to make sure that there is no chance of failure. Also, the change should be such that, it is accepted by all stakeholders. So, the process of metamorphosis is indubitably time taking. For some plans like building space research center or genesis reformation policies in the field of education, 5 years may not be enough. If a new leadership is brought, it cannot be assured that the plans of previous leadership will be implemented or completed, though, they are good for society. In contrast, sometimes, it is possible to analyze the success or failure of a leader in 5 years. If the leader is proved to be inefficient, he/she should step down for good cause.
New leadership is also essential to the success of the field. However, new leader needs sometime to get accustomed to his position and responsibilities as a reason it is not good idea for an efficient leader to step down after 5 years. Along with the zeal and fervor of new leader some germane experience is also necessary to succeed in any field so changing leaders every 5 years may not be fruitful always.
Conversely, it is important to go parallel with the rest of the world. New people bring new and innovative ideas which helps to keep the field abreast of changes happening around. Old policies or ideas which might impede the progress of the field must be eradicated, so revitalization through new leadership is important, though not a frequent one. Also success holistic and it is not measured only through the frequent change that a field undergoes, so even consistency plays an important role. Frequently changing the headmaster of an elementary school , would definitely bring bad name for school.
Giving a new birth to any field is requisite for success. However the leadership cannot be ephemeral. Any leader who is a new elect to a position needs sometime to implement good changes. If the leader seems to be inefficient even after giving sufficient time, he should definitely step down after five years. Along with giving rebirth to a field, there are number of other factors through which the amount of success is gauged. The claim can be agreed conditionally as the reason is correct to only certain extent.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 402, Rule ID: ADVERB_WORD_ORDER[3]
Message: The adverb 'always' is usually not used at the end of a sentence.
...aders every 5 years may not be fruitful always. Conversely, it is important to go p...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 350, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...s important, though not a frequent one. Also success holistic and it is not measured...
^^^^
Line 7, column 555, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...g the headmaster of an elementary school , would definitely bring bad name for sch...
^^
Line 9, column 59, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
... to any field is requisite for success. However the leadership cannot be ephemeral. Any...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, conversely, however, if, may, so, while, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 40.0 19.5258426966 205% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.4196629213 137% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 33.0505617978 61% => OK
Preposition: 71.0 58.6224719101 121% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2603.0 2235.4752809 116% => OK
No of words: 535.0 442.535393258 121% => OK
Chars per words: 4.86542056075 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.80937282943 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79463849471 2.79657885939 100% => OK
Unique words: 238.0 215.323595506 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.444859813084 0.4932671777 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 814.5 704.065955056 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 30.0 20.2370786517 148% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.877419248 60.3974514979 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.7666666667 118.986275619 73% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.8333333333 23.4991977007 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.1 5.21951772744 40% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 23.0 10.2758426966 224% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => 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: 0.26515717665 0.243740707755 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0769063617803 0.0831039109588 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0536683491023 0.0758088955206 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.177058848469 0.150359130593 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0519870511835 0.0667264976115 78% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.4 14.1392134831 74% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 48.8420337079 128% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 12.1743820225 71% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.67 12.1639044944 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.73 8.38706741573 92% => OK
difficult_words: 110.0 100.480337079 109% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
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.