Some believe that local communities should rely on citizen volunteers for projects benefiting those communities (e.g., organizing youth sports leagues and collecting donations for charity). Others believe that local communities are better served when professional community leaders with the necessary skills and time instead handle such projects.
Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your own
position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and
supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented.
To make a project successful, it is necessary to include all the stakeholders involved in it whether engaged during input or output processes. Thus, in any community project, on one side are those who are involved in building it and on the other side, there are those who will get benefit from it. Many pundits think that in these projects, local volunteers should be engaged due to many reasons whereas there are also people who reckon that these assignments must be completed by professionally trained people due to their better know how along with other factors. I personally have a view that those people who will get the benefit must be engaged in these activities rather than relying only on the well trained outsiders.
There is no doubt that a professional is the one who has taken the training in that particular field and know the minute details involved in various processes. They learned theoretical knowledge given by the veterans of the field and they also have an exposure to the practical work while during their interships and work experiences. Even, they are awared about the situations when things got worse and have knowledge to tackle those within a required time frame. For instance, to collect donations, a professional is supposed to have the various options to explore and with this prior knowledge, a lot of time can be saved. However, some questions that are these things sufficient for the successful community program.
Ofcourse, no body can beat the knowledge which accumulates from many generations during the long periods. Thus, opinion of the locals where the project is going to be launched and to whom it will benefit, can't be ignored. The residents of the area can know the various things which can help to make the program successful which is quite difficult for any outsider professional due to unfamilarity of the region. For instance, while organizing blood donation camp, local organiser have the familarity with different families of the area and know that which community or family is reluctant for these type of works and require extra effort. However, the unfamiliar expert is likely to follow the established protocols and procedures and may face difficulty to sort the families. Apart from that, the local people can be more dedicated to the cause because they know that it will give benefit to their families. This may not be the possibility on the other side because they are doing it just for the sake of their job.
Overall, it can be said that locals and professionals both are complementary to each other while pursuing community works because both have their own advantages. But, due to the more compelling reasons like attachment to the roots and brotherhood knowledge of the neighbourhood makes the engagement of the local people more persuasive while deciding on the matter. Locals can be trained to get the more results.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 11, Rule ID: ANY_BODY[2]
Message: Did you mean 'nobody'?
Suggestion: nobody
...cessful community program. Ofcourse, no body can beat the knowledge which accumulate...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 206, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...e launched and to whom it will benefit, cant be ignored. The residents of the area c...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, may, so, thus, well, whereas, while, apart from, for instance, no doubt
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.5258426966 133% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 14.8657303371 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 22.0 11.3162921348 194% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 33.0505617978 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 57.0 58.6224719101 97% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 12.9106741573 39% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2406.0 2235.4752809 108% => OK
No of words: 482.0 442.535393258 109% => OK
Chars per words: 4.99170124481 5.05705443957 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68556276237 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70448715798 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 226.0 215.323595506 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.46887966805 0.4932671777 95% => OK
syllable_count: 767.7 704.065955056 109% => 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: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.5301973559 60.3974514979 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.631578947 118.986275619 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.3684210526 23.4991977007 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 5.21951772744 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
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: 0.20416069873 0.243740707755 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0646321650633 0.0831039109588 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0564074970399 0.0758088955206 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125260641939 0.150359130593 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0236858648158 0.0667264976115 35% => 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: 14.8 14.1392134831 105% => 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: 11.96 12.1639044944 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.55 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 112.0 100.480337079 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => 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.