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.
Nowadays, any field such as the ones cited in the author’s claim is based on hierarchies, which require some of the people to be in charge of all the rest. People often debate about whether those in power should step down after a defined amount of time or not. I think that the plethora of different circumstances that need to be considered cannot bring to a one-sided claim. Thus, I partially agree with the author in saying that in some cases those in power should step down after 5 years in order to revitalize the enterprise considered. Nonetheless, I partially disagree with the reason on which the author’s claim is based because, in my opinion, revitalization through new leadership is not always the surest path to success.
In the first place, let’s consider some of the cases in which a change in the people in power is necessary. For instance, let’s consider politics and government administration. In almost every nation of the world, such as the United States or Italy, the heads of the government have to be replaced, either by election or chosen by other members of the government, periodically. This surely represents the best way to ensure that any nation is guided in the most preferable way possible: if a president or any other member of the head of the government turns out to be not prepared for the job or does not fully satisfy the expectations and requests of the people, then it is reasonable and necessary to have the chance to replace him. Nevertheless, if those in power show to fulfill their job in an excellent way, they will have the chance to run again and to be elected again by the people.
On the other hand, there are some circumstances in which changing the people in power would not lead to secure success. Rather, this choice might badly affect the future of an enterprise, eventually leading it to a collapse. As an example, let’s take into consideration Apple, one of the leaders in electronic devices. The head of Apple has always been Steve Jobs, replaced only after his death. It was thanks to his ideas and his specific way to establish his business that Apple became one of the most famous brands known worldwide. Based on the author’s reason, a revitalization in the head of this enterprise would have been a better choice. Instead, the success Apple had since its establishment is a clear example of how in some cases leaders should not be replaced if the results are consistent and meet the standards required.
In conclusion, I would say that there are some cases in which it is necessary for those in power to step down after a definite amount of time, thus partially agreeing with the author’s statement. Nevertheless, in some circumstances this change in power could lead to worse consequences, thus would not represent the best way to success.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 105, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
... is based on hierarchies, which require some of the people to be in charge of all the rest....
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 36, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
.... In the first place, let’s consider some of the cases in which a change in the people i...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 794, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an excellent way" with adverb for "excellent"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...hose in power show to fulfill their job in an excellent way, they will have the chance to run again...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, nevertheless, nonetheless, so, then, thus, for instance, i think, in conclusion, such as, in my opinion, in some cases, in the first place, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.5258426966 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 33.0505617978 94% => OK
Preposition: 86.0 58.6224719101 147% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2337.0 2235.4752809 105% => OK
No of words: 487.0 442.535393258 110% => OK
Chars per words: 4.79876796715 5.05705443957 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69766713281 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80079275218 2.79657885939 100% => OK
Unique words: 229.0 215.323595506 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.47022587269 0.4932671777 95% => OK
syllable_count: 733.5 704.065955056 104% => 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: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.9158960224 60.3974514979 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.0 118.986275619 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.6315789474 23.4991977007 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.84210526316 5.21951772744 169% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.269044220472 0.243740707755 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0793903553345 0.0831039109588 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0678516818834 0.0758088955206 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.162472058922 0.150359130593 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.094073454973 0.0667264976115 141% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 14.1392134831 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 48.8420337079 112% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.86 12.1639044944 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.02 8.38706741573 96% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 100.480337079 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => 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: 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.