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.
Innovative thinking and revitalisation is essential to any enterprise. Leaders must think creatively in order to adjust to the rapidly developing world around us, but if those in power is capable of constantly adjusting their thinking to keep up with global advancements, there should be no need for their stepping down to be compulsory.
We can all agree that even the most ubiquitous aspects of our lives are constantly developing and evolving. There is no stop to technological advancements, new political policies, or economical fluctions. We expect those in power of different industries to lead their respective enterprise to success as they strive to be the leaders of their field. For each one of them to climb to an authoritative position, they more than likely have demonstrated the innovation and ingenuity to keep their industries moving forward. Mark Zuckerberg created a new social media platform that made communication more effortless, Steve Jobs created a piece of technology that made our lives more conveninent, and the President of the United States was won his election because the new policies which he intended to implement moved an entire nation. However, despite how remarkable each of these leaders were initially, they are all aware that if their thinking does not advance, they would not be able to advance, and in the case of the President, has a chance for his power to be stripped. The incentive to keep their leadership position acts as a catalyst to constantly reshape their thinking, and if leaders possess this adaptive ability, there should be no need to forcefully remove them from power after five year regardless of their performance.
The possibility of a termination of their leadership can sometimes compel leaders to work harder. Those in power are put in their positions because there are people who believe in their abilities. Once they lose their support, they will almost surely be replaced. Threatened by potentially being stripped of power should they do a subpar job, leaders are more likely to listen to the voice of the people which they represent. Although the President of the United States is required to step down after two terms, the election after his first term forces him to do his best in the first four years. If for any reason the public loses faith in him, he knows that it will become unlikely for him to win his second election. However, if leaders know that they are forced to step down regardless of how they perform, it might be easy to lose the drive and motivation to keep improving.
Another complication is that thousands of enterprises are private businesses, which the leaders are not only the representative of the businesses, but are also the founders. Returning to a previously mentioned examples, in lieu of the Facebook scandal in which the website was accused of collecting user information, the thought of asking Mark Zuckerberg to step down as CEO of Facebook might still sound ridiculous and improbable. The reason being that he is the founder of the enterprise, and how the business performs is a reflection of him, and no one else. With several hundred competing social media platforms, Mark Zuckerberg will devise means to assert Facebook's dominance. His brand is personal and most meaningful to him, therefore he will do his best to revitalize his business. Suppose that Zuckerberg was actually forced to step down. The next leader might see Facebook as merely another enterprise and does not input the same amount of effort into ensuring its success.
Ultimately, although enterprise needs revitalization to achieve constant success, those in power are capable of adjusting their thinking to ensure that. Instead of forcing them to step down, they shoud be permitted to keep their position as long as they demonstrate outstanding performance as a leader.
- Claim: Governments must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support they need in order to thrive.Reason: It is primarily in cities that a nation's cultural traditions are preserved and generated.Write a response in which you discuss the e 83
- Some people believe that government funding of the arts is necessary to ensure that the arts can flourish and be available to all people. Others believe that government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of the arts.Write a response in which you 83
- Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed 66
- 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 ext 66
- In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution without first being strongly influenced by past achievements within that field.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement 63
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 627, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'loses'' or 'los's'?
Suggestion: loses'; los's
...our years. If for any reason the public loses faith in him, he knows that it will bec...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, however, if, second, so, still, therefore
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 33.0 19.5258426966 169% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 14.8657303371 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.3162921348 133% => OK
Pronoun: 71.0 33.0505617978 215% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 93.0 58.6224719101 159% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 12.9106741573 163% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3223.0 2235.4752809 144% => OK
No of words: 633.0 442.535393258 143% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.0916271722 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.01592376844 4.55969084622 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86814317852 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 306.0 215.323595506 142% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.483412322275 0.4932671777 98% => OK
syllable_count: 1017.0 704.065955056 144% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 6.24550561798 192% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 8.0 1.77640449438 450% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.2370786517 124% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.0950830244 60.3974514979 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.92 118.986275619 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.32 23.4991977007 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.76 5.21951772744 53% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 17.0 10.2758426966 165% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.172641495048 0.243740707755 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0513477537987 0.0831039109588 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0332301140692 0.0758088955206 44% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.107190436461 0.150359130593 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0121969626541 0.0667264976115 18% => 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: 15.2 14.1392134831 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.8420337079 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.1743820225 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.54 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 151.0 100.480337079 150% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 11.8971910112 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => 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.