Government officials should rely on their own judgment rather than unquestioningly carry out the will of the people whom they serve.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
Being credulous in any line may result in various scandals. Be it government or private organizations. It is therefore, necessary to cross check the specious orders from seniors at personal levels before they are implemented. This kind of approach serves both, the nation as well as the officer, in best ways. Blind trust often results in one becoming victim of treachery. At worst, it can result in one being held culpable for neglecting corruption. There are several reasons for government officials to act judiciously at their own discretion.
To begin with, if government officials show amenable attitude, they are more likely to be persuaded by their senior officers for indulging into nepotism, bribery and corruption. Corruption is like a fungus it can spread at the slightest sign of negligence. And no sooner than it is born whole system is found rife with it. Corruption is obscured but reality in most of the governments. Thus, instead of implementing all orders enthusiastically, an officer shall take time to judge them for their legitimacy.
Additionally, few cases of human error may also occur if not of corruption. Questioning government mandates in-house before implementation can result in eradicating loop holes. Thus increasing the quality of the system. Take for example the housing loans of 2009 that beget recession. If the government's officials had bothered to take a look at these organizations providing housing loans to everybody, a myriad of public losses could have been prevented.
Moreover, docile officers are themselves problems and that too at vast levels. It is not always necessary that government department's actions are only for the benefit of its citizens. Take the recent event of NSA spying on communications of almost every citizens. If Mr. Snowden had not decided to blow the whistle, most of us would still remain in disbelief that government does not violate any laws.
However, this is not always possible, specially in few departments like military, national security agency and intelligence agencies. Instead the subordinates can be litigated for questioning the commanding officers orders. Even though, it is frequent that soldiers and agents are court-marshaled for their non-compliance. This suggests that independent of systems requirements one should always raise his voice if he finds that something is not the way it should be.
Conclusively, vigilance is advised for the people who work in departments which impact most on the public. Even a smallest account neglected can later on reveal itself as the biggest scandals.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 273, Rule ID: BOTH_AS_WELL_AS[1]
Message: Probable usage error. Use 'and' after 'both'.
Suggestion: and
...ind of approach serves both, the nation as well as the officer, in best ways. Blind trust ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 297, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[4]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'in the best'.
Suggestion: in the best
...oth, the nation as well as the officer, in best ways. Blind trust often results in one ...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 135, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Instead,
...urity agency and intelligence agencies. Instead the subordinates can be litigated for q...
^^^^^^^
Line 11, column 113, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[1]
Message: Use 'the' with the superlative.
Suggestion: the
...s which impact most on the public. Even a smallest account neglected can later on...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, look, may, moreover, so, still, therefore, thus, well, for example, kind of, as well as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.5258426966 118% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 33.0 33.0505617978 100% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 58.6224719101 89% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 12.9106741573 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2185.0 2235.4752809 98% => OK
No of words: 408.0 442.535393258 92% => OK
Chars per words: 5.35539215686 5.05705443957 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49433085973 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08248667418 2.79657885939 110% => OK
Unique words: 247.0 215.323595506 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.605392156863 0.4932671777 123% => OK
syllable_count: 675.0 704.065955056 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.740449438202 0% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 20.2370786517 133% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 23.0359550562 65% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.6290552537 60.3974514979 57% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 80.9259259259 118.986275619 68% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.1111111111 23.4991977007 64% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.66666666667 5.21951772744 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 5.13820224719 214% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.83258426966 207% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0947177248021 0.243740707755 39% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0231299702832 0.0831039109588 28% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0319605204662 0.0758088955206 42% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0484268798819 0.150359130593 32% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0207895220663 0.0667264976115 31% => 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: 11.4 14.1392134831 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 47.79 48.8420337079 98% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.1743820225 85% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.22 12.1639044944 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.26 8.38706741573 110% => OK
difficult_words: 126.0 100.480337079 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 11.8971910112 50% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 11.2143820225 71% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.