Some people prefer to spend their lives doing the same things and avoiding change. Others, however, think change is always a good thing.
Certain folks opted to invert their lives doing a similar thing and ignoring the changes. However, other masses argue that change is quite beneficial. I believe that change has more merits than that, doing similar activities.
On the one hand, some people reckon that doing the same sorts of jobs is much better than that of doing a plethora of works. It is widely acknowledged that focusing on one respective sphere can bring enormous positive impacts. Moreover, to ameliorate the quality of life, one must assert a particular realm. For instance, there is ample evidence to suggest that, aiming for only one aspect can bring adequate experience in real life. Therefore. overlooking abundant of work field would be redundant.
On the contrary, others assert that changes have more benefits, as the numerous masses believed that targeting the plenty of sides would give them to learn a huge amount of knowledge. Furthermore, he/she can progress in each field by indulging in various sectors. Similarly, many people can do a myriad of work during their careers. As an example, a recent survey by the United Nations Organization showed, about half ratio pupils in the USA are engaged in various fields, as a result, they had achieved a lot of advancement in their social life.
As such it can be concluded that, aiming a host of sectors can bring huge positive results in each respective field. Whereas, spending the whole career on similar things can bring a few merits on the people life.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 435, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...bring adequate experience in real life. Therefore. overlooking abundant of work field wou...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 446, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Overlooking
...ate experience in real life. Therefore. overlooking abundant of work field would be redunda...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 118, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Whereas” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...itive results in each respective field. Whereas, spending the whole career on similar t...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, however, if, look, moreover, similarly, so, therefore, whereas, for instance, as a result, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 1.00243902439 998% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 1.0 6.8 15% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 3.15609756098 317% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 20.0 5.60731707317 357% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 30.0 33.7804878049 89% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 3.97073170732 126% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1254.0 965.302439024 130% => OK
No of words: 250.0 196.424390244 127% => OK
Chars per words: 5.016 4.92477711251 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.97635364384 3.73543355544 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55281491691 2.65546596893 96% => OK
Unique words: 153.0 106.607317073 144% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.612 0.547539520022 112% => OK
syllable_count: 392.4 283.868780488 138% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 1.53170731707 261% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 1.0 4.33902439024 23% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.07073170732 374% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 8.94146341463 157% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.4926829268 76% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 44.1209492562 43.030603864 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.5714285714 112.824112599 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.8571428571 22.9334400587 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.5 5.23603664747 162% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 1.69756097561 177% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 3.70975609756 270% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.176104919994 0.215688989381 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0619411174172 0.103423049105 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0706359151537 0.0843802449381 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111330999413 0.15604864568 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0641664935017 0.0819641961636 78% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 13.2329268293 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 61.2550243902 89% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.3012195122 96% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.54 11.4140731707 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.15 8.06136585366 114% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 40.7170731707 182% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 11.4329268293 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.9970731707 80% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.