It is suggested that all young adults should undertake a period of unpaid work, helping people in the community. Does it bring more benefits or drawbacks to the young people?
It is an undeniable fact the in present era almost every individual is getting indulged excessively into unethical practices due to the advent of internet. Therefore, a suggestion has been proposed by some people that youngsters ought to participate in some community provide aid to their neighborhood, without any remuneration being paid to them. Although, some juveniles might feel clueless about their objective of working without money, there are undoubtedly several other adolescents who certainly would learn the importance of team work, helping them later in their life.
To begin with, the main challenge that some teenagers might have to face is the uncertainty of their objective without them being paid. The reason being, a few people give a significant value to money in their life and if the same is not provided, they would feel discouraged to continue to the charitable works. For example, a country like Bangladesh is reluctant to provide any expenses to the young people hired for social work and that is why very less voluntary actions are being taken by youth and are less cogent from such nations.
Contrarily, the greatest benefit that would be scrutinized when juveniles are made to be a part of charitable work is their ameliorating team working skills. This is because, when they see other team members who work with them under the same platform without being paid there would be many instances where these young residents would be rendered with a healthy environment and can acquire guidance on how to work diligently in a team. To illustrate, a community magazine conducted a survey and stated that more than 75% of young people were able to boost their skills of working in a group: cooperation and team work, especially, when they took part in any social or charitable work. Resultantly, the young adults would surely apply these skills for their betterment in their futuristic years.
To conclude, despite some drawbacks of not having only objective could be seen in some situations, millions of other young members of the social groups can accelerate their team working traits which would certainly assist them in the later phase of their life.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, so, therefore, for example, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 13.1623246493 182% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 7.85571142285 165% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 7.30460921844 164% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 24.0651302605 116% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 41.998997996 126% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1828.0 1615.20841683 113% => OK
No of words: 358.0 315.596192385 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1061452514 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34981470047 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69096930754 2.80592935109 96% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 176.041082164 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.541899441341 0.561755894193 96% => OK
syllable_count: 564.3 506.74238477 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 8.0 2.52805611222 316% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 16.0721442886 68% => 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: 32.0 20.2975951904 158% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 52.2622123812 49.4020404114 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 166.181818182 106.682146367 156% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.5454545455 20.7667163134 157% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.09090909091 7.06120827912 58% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.177428981151 0.244688304435 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0739241734146 0.084324248473 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0516984990079 0.0667982634062 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.108867630049 0.151304729494 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0364953931615 0.056905535591 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.9 13.0946893788 144% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.0 50.2224549098 78% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 11.3001002004 140% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.95 12.4159519038 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.71 8.58950901804 101% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 78.4519038076 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.78957915832 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.8 10.1190380762 146% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.