At many companies today, applicants are often rejected due to old age. Do you think this is a positive or a negative development?
In many enterprises nowadays, old candidates are not the choice of recruiters. Personally, I opine that although this phenomenon has positive sides, it also exists some negative aspects.
The positive aspects of this trend are attributable to several reasons. First of all, by refusing the applications of old applicants, recruiters can create an oppoetunity for young people to work. Since nowadays, young generations are very creative and well-equipped with soft skills, thus, this can help the corporations to fully develope in the foreseeable future. To exemplify, when doing about a beverage project, young people often have new ideas about how to make the product gain momentum. Moreover, employers cannot determine whether old candidates are capable of handling a mountain of work or work overtime. Since when some individuals are old, many health issues will appear such as being exhausted easily or having hear impairment.
However, there is also debilitating effect of this phenomenon which cannot be neglected. The main point is that old employees often have more life experiences which can be used to address difficult problems than young people. It goes without saying thai although young people are well-equipped with many skills but they are also inexperience in tackling issues which happen suddenly. For example, young employees often have trouble in dealing with customer's problems as they do not know how to fully satisfy them. Therefore, thanks to the appearance of old employees, not only are the problems solved, but also young people can be instructed to how to deal with problems.
In conclusion, although rejecting old applicants can bring some benefits for both the company and young generation, there is also existed drawback if employers do not accept their application form.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, moreover, so, therefore, thus, well, for example, in conclusion, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 41.998997996 79% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1530.0 1615.20841683 95% => OK
No of words: 283.0 315.596192385 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.40636042403 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10153676581 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84556090187 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 176.041082164 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.597173144876 0.561755894193 106% => OK
syllable_count: 469.8 506.74238477 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.8771038205 49.4020404114 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.285714286 106.682146367 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.2142857143 20.7667163134 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.35714285714 7.06120827912 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.200558332956 0.244688304435 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.071277763798 0.084324248473 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0391579314845 0.0667982634062 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.140234191176 0.151304729494 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0369595283076 0.056905535591 65% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 13.0946893788 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 50.2224549098 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.1 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.87 8.58950901804 103% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 78.4519038076 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.