Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Leadership comes naturally. One cannot learn to be a leader.
Leadership have been a controversial issue since the beginning of time. Many prominent philosophers and scientists have been searching different methods to find practical ways to train the leaders. Some of them believe that leadership comes naturally, and some believe that we can train anyone to be a charismatic leader. I personally agree to both of these ideas merely to some extent. Although some people have a natural potential to become a leader, we can also train every person to become a leader.
On the one hand, some people have a natural instinct to become a front-runner. Intrinsically some people have an ability to dominate others even without formal training. Not only can they dictate others what to do, but also they can inhibit them from doing specific tasks. For example, even in elementary schools we can find some children that can manipulate others such as not playing with the children outside the group, gathering in a certain place, and so forth. Natural ability to manage other people's mind is an ability that can help these people to control others without even thinking about it. All of us are familiar with the word charisma. Maybe this particular word refers to this natural ability of becoming a leader. Hence, the higher the natural instinct in leadership, the better the chance to become a leader.
On the other hand, we can train a leader by teaching him or putting him in a suitable environment. Although some people have natural skills to become a leader, we can teach certain skills to everyone in order to make them ready to become a leader in the future. It is crystal-clear that great leaders have specific talents such as being articulate, decisive, potent, and so on; As a result, we can teach these certain skills via different methods to make them ready to become a future leader. Furthermore, by being in a suitable environment people can gain leadership skills. We know that a notorious person such as Adolf Hitler used to be a really shy person in his youth, but by being in a right time and a right place he learned a lot of skills and nurtured his abilities to make a brutal leader. Recently conducted research show that people studying leadership in private classes or taking relevant university courses have a better chance to become a leader. Thus, the more we acquire knowledge about leadership, the more chance we have to become a leader.
In a nutshell, although some people believe that we cannot teach someone to be a leader and being a leader is an internal skill, I believe that we can raise a generation of leaders via practical training; moreover, should we find people with natural leadership skills and also train them in a right way, we can raise a generation of powerful leaders. It will be predicted that with the expansion of science in different fields such as management, leadership, diplomacy, and so on, we can nurture a generation of talented leaders in the future.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 640, Rule ID: A_RB_NN[1]
Message: You used an adverb ('really') instead an adjective, or a noun ('person') instead of another adjective.
... person such as Adolf Hitler used to be a really person in his youth, but by being in a right t...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 289, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a right way" with adverb for "right"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...l leadership skills and also train them in a right way, we can raise a generation of powerful ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, hence, if, may, moreover, really, so, thus, for example, such as, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 15.1003584229 93% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 9.8082437276 173% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 13.8261648746 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.0286738351 91% => OK
Pronoun: 47.0 43.0788530466 109% => OK
Preposition: 67.0 52.1666666667 128% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.0752688172 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2434.0 1977.66487455 123% => OK
No of words: 503.0 407.700716846 123% => OK
Chars per words: 4.83896620278 4.8611393121 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.73578520332 4.48103885553 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68785364728 2.67179642975 101% => OK
Unique words: 210.0 212.727598566 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.417495029821 0.524837075471 80% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 786.6 618.680645161 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 9.59856630824 115% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.86738351254 321% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 68.9505302361 48.9658058833 141% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.636363636 100.406767564 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8636363636 20.6045352989 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.45454545455 5.45110844103 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 17.0 11.8709677419 143% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.185435891549 0.236089414692 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0640694413406 0.076458572812 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0434479210369 0.0737576698707 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.126732146854 0.150856017488 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0306238229633 0.0645574589148 47% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 11.7677419355 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 58.1214874552 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.1575268817 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.09 10.9000537634 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.62 8.01818996416 95% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 86.8835125448 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.002688172 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => 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: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.