While some leaders in government, sports, industry, and other areas attribute their success to a well-developed sense of competition, a society can better prepare its young people for leadership by instilling in them a sense of cooperation.
The author claims that, in order to foster leadership of young people, it better to develop them with sense of cooperation instead of competition. In my view, both competition and cooperation benefit people to perform well in their leader positions.
On one hand, it is correct that leadership entails ability of cooperation. The main purpose of a good leader is to unit people together and achieve a sophisticated job that hard to be done by individual effort. A leader is unsuccessful if he or she cannot provide a congenial atmosphere in the workspace. Once the team members work separately or even work in the animosity, it cannot accomplish an even simple job and the leader of that team is unqualified. Therefore, having a sense of cooperation helps build a successful team.
On the other hand, competition still an essential element for a vigorous team, hence is a necessity that a leader need to possess. It is necessary for a leader to keep in mind that proper competition can activate the power of change and innovation in a team. By the process of debating and challenge, it helps team members to understand their weakness and explore the new possibility, therefore, not only it will help solve problem that a group is tackling with but also instill vitality for the creativity. All these things are important for a successful team and the team leader.
To sum up, the claim mentioned merely focus on one side and thus is deficient. A good team leader need to balance the team between competition and cooperation, these two elements are the essence of a sound and effective team.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 75, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'betters', 'wells'?
Suggestion: betters; wells
...o foster leadership of young people, it better to develop them with sense of cooperati...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, if, so, still, therefore, thus, well, in my view, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.5258426966 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 33.0505617978 64% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 58.6224719101 63% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1330.0 2235.4752809 59% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 272.0 442.535393258 61% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.88970588235 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06108636974 4.55969084622 89% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91477117515 2.79657885939 104% => OK
Unique words: 148.0 215.323595506 69% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.544117647059 0.4932671777 110% => OK
syllable_count: 424.8 704.065955056 60% => 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: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 20.2370786517 64% => 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: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.9530799413 60.3974514979 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.307692308 118.986275619 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9230769231 23.4991977007 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.38461538462 5.21951772744 141% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.234800994657 0.243740707755 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0864009906872 0.0831039109588 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0674520315686 0.0758088955206 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.150931400274 0.150359130593 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.102514316822 0.0667264976115 154% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 14.1392134831 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.8420337079 105% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.1743820225 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.08 12.1639044944 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.11 8.38706741573 97% => OK
difficult_words: 60.0 100.480337079 60% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => 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: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.