Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
It is more enjoyable to have a job where you work only three days a week for long hours than to have a job where you work five days a week for shorter hours.
The role of occupation in making a more prosperous and cheerful life has been among the most controversial subjects, which often provoke many discussions. It is an indisputable fact that working hours can impressively affect the quality of pleasuring our job, as an important part of our life, and consequently, feel shadow of happiness. Some people keep endorsing the claim that fewer working days with prolonged hours is more delightful whereas others dismiss this idea. It is my firm conviction that working for fewer days, however, for longer hours is more felicific. In what follows, I will thoroughly elucidate what rationales my perspective is based on.
The first and the foremost reason is that employees themselves may occasionally requires to get their official tasks in other offices done during the working hours. conclusively, should they be capable of keeping their life in normal condition to manage their personal tasks, they will need to be none assigned to work for a few days in week. My own example of an architect working in a construction company is a compelling example of this. Occasionally, I have to spend about a complete day a week in the post office to fulfill my personal routine tasks. Since based on the enacted rules, the company is allowed to give me just 2 hours vacation in month, I have to beg my sister or my mother to get my tasks done which is so embarrassing for me. Therefore, if I benefit a few days non assigned, I will be needless of soliciting others to do my personal work.
The second pivotal vindicating point is that we, as human being with specific aptitude, are bound on short and episodic holidays in order to free up our mind from total stress tolerating throughout the week. It is crystally obvious that a short camping in the nearby forest for a couple of days is like a miracle to help us to thrive flairs which lead to more efficient performance in work for the next week. With dense working schedule for all days in the week hardly we can find a time to relax and rest or have time to spend with our dears. It is irrefutable that only one day a week for activities vital for our both mentally and physically health is really unfair, and little in no way is beneficial.
To put in a nutshell, we cannot overlook the great impact of working hour in our routine life. As a matter of fact, our social occupation and responsibilities should not confine us from getting our personal task done or hindering us from spending time to relax and rest in every way you might think of, including getting together with family and friends or even short constructive trips. Confining the working day with prolonged hours totally cover these issues and solve such obstacles which, certainly, give rise to feel happier.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 90, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'getting'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'require' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: getting
...es themselves may occasionally requires to get their official tasks in other offices d...
^^^^^^
Line 2, column 166, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Conclusively
... offices done during the working hours. conclusively, should they be capable of keeping thei...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, first, however, if, look, may, really, second, so, therefore, whereas, as a matter of fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 15.1003584229 139% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 9.8082437276 112% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 13.8261648746 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 50.0 43.0788530466 116% => OK
Preposition: 67.0 52.1666666667 128% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.0752688172 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2285.0 1977.66487455 116% => OK
No of words: 482.0 407.700716846 118% => OK
Chars per words: 4.74066390041 4.8611393121 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68556276237 4.48103885553 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73000115129 2.67179642975 102% => OK
Unique words: 266.0 212.727598566 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.551867219917 0.524837075471 105% => OK
syllable_count: 716.4 618.680645161 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 9.59856630824 125% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6003584229 87% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 20.1344086022 129% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 50.1661744777 48.9658058833 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.944444444 100.406767564 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.7777777778 20.6045352989 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.77777777778 5.45110844103 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.314278818035 0.236089414692 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0968520911535 0.076458572812 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0589863106513 0.0737576698707 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.1819316706 0.150856017488 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.04480998464 0.0645574589148 69% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 11.7677419355 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 58.1214874552 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.1575268817 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.51 10.9000537634 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.46 8.01818996416 106% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 86.8835125448 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.002688172 115% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.0537634409 123% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 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: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.