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.

This topic raises the controversial issue of whether leaders should be replaced in a five-year rhythm. Indisputably, staying in the position of power for an indefinite amount of time causes the risk for corruption, declining motivation to change something and a lack of newly brought energy or ideas from other, potentially more competent, leaders. Nevertheless, setting a maximum term period may hinder long-term investments or decisions to be made, and might force skilled and nearly irreplaceable leaders to make space for someone less compatible with the position. Thus, I generally disagree with the opinion that a person in power has to leave his or her position after a set amount of time, regardless of the achievement made or the satisfaction of the population.
First, I want to point out that a long-time perspective of an enterprise, an educational institution or a government is crucial for a stable development or growth in the desired key performance indicators. I would like to point out that with an already settled leave of a leader in power, the decisions made then won’t go widely beyond this timeframe since their achievements just get appreciated for their time in office. To illustrate that further, the example of leaders in the governments show exactly these patterns. The presidents or chancellors merely get honored or disliked for the situation during their leadership, even though this is mostly the result of the prior laws enforced by other people. Consequently, it is pretty obvious that these leaders want the country they are leading to performing best during these years, and the focus on the long-term outcomes loses in relevance. The same applies to people in power in other fields.
Furthermore, if someone is doing a very great job and all his or her employees agree with his leadership or even face a lack of alternatives, the rule of a five-year period could do more harm than good. Specifically, in family own businesses, the people on top often care personally so much about the company that they put an enormous amount of effort in maintaining or increasing its standing for new generations, not only a couple of years. In addition, leaders who have to leave in politics might represent the population to a bigger extent like it was the case in the latest US election. In my opinion, former president Obama could have benefitted more Americans by staying in office than Clinton or Trump.
In conclusion, although there are reasons such as a higher possibility of corruption to happen and overriding rules of leaders just to stay in office, I believe that the benefits of a flexible approach to this issue are a more beneficial solution due to the mentioned points. As long as there are equal chances for other applicants to replace leaders in their positions, the system should not be changed.

Average: 6.6 (1 vote)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Grammar and spelling errors:
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ying in office than Clinton or Trump. In conclusion, although there are reasons ...

Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, first, furthermore, if, may, nevertheless, so, then, thus, as to, in addition, in conclusion, such as, in my opinion

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.5258426966 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 14.8657303371 121% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 34.0 33.0505617978 103% => OK
Preposition: 73.0 58.6224719101 125% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 12.9106741573 147% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2378.0 2235.4752809 106% => OK
No of words: 472.0 442.535393258 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.03813559322 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.6610686524 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95512496752 2.79657885939 106% => OK
Unique words: 269.0 215.323595506 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.569915254237 0.4932671777 116% => OK
syllable_count: 753.3 704.065955056 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.2370786517 79% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 29.0 23.0359550562 126% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 60.2660766933 60.3974514979 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 148.625 118.986275619 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.5 23.4991977007 126% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.125 5.21951772744 156% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.105235898592 0.243740707755 43% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0345378641577 0.0831039109588 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0178808805949 0.0758088955206 24% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0618410627364 0.150359130593 41% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.013639013062 0.0667264976115 20% => 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: 17.1 14.1392134831 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.04 48.8420337079 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.1743820225 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.54 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.46 8.38706741573 113% => OK
difficult_words: 131.0 100.480337079 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.8971910112 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.2143820225 121% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => 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.