Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? People in the past are more interested in improving their neighbourhood (the area where they live) than now.
Neighborhood, the area people live in, has triggered a heated discussion on whether people were more interested in improving the enviroment of neighborhood compared with decades ago. Modern people, in some peoples view, devote themselves to improving the neighborhood more than before. Contrary to these people's view is my perspective that people are less interested in improving the local environment today because the lack of time and knowledge.
To begin with, contemporary people, including students and adults, can distribute less time to improving the local area. First, students nowadays live a hectic school life. They have to spend about 10 hours per weekday attending classes, doing homeworks or preparing for the exams. On weekends they may attend some extra-classes so that they will compete with others in the college entrance exams. In comparison, there are less competition in the past so students didn't need to study as hard as they do today. Therefore, little time can be allocated to the environment of neighborhood compared with decades ago. Similarly, This kind of competition also appear among adults. The employment opportunities are limited so adults have to work very hard in order to get a promising and rewarding jod, or get promotion. To work hard, employees are supposed to spend more time on work and even work overtime. With little time allocated to improving the neighborhood, present people are less likely to improve the local environment.
What should be euqally emthasized is that modern people lack knowledge and money to better the environment of local area. In the past, most people own the expertise to change the local enviornment, such as planting trees and flowers. These kinds of knowledge are neglected by modern education because eople are required to learn more professional knowledge and become expert in a specific area. Contemporary people, even provided with suitable tools and equipment, are less likely to plant a tree without assistance. In the past, people involve more in farming and most of them master skills to improve the environment. What's more, even with enough knowledge, modern people are less interested in improving the local environment owing to the financial cost. The price of tools or materials, used to improve the enviornment, has considerably raised than before. As a result, it is not easy for a individual to improve the local area on his own.
In conclusion, people in the past were more interested in improving the local environment because they have more leisure time and they were more capable to do such things compared with contemporary people.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 465, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...ess competition in the past so students didnt need to study as hard as they do today....
^^^^^
Line 5, column 621, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: What's
...ster skills to improve the environment. Whats more, even with enough knowledge, moder...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 894, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...before. As a result, it is not easy for a individual to improve the local area on...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, may, similarly, so, therefore, in conclusion, kind of, such as, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 15.1003584229 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 9.8082437276 61% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 13.8261648746 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 11.0286738351 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 43.0788530466 39% => OK
Preposition: 68.0 52.1666666667 130% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 8.0752688172 223% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2216.0 1977.66487455 112% => OK
No of words: 422.0 407.700716846 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25118483412 4.8611393121 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.53239876712 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86373206569 2.67179642975 107% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 212.727598566 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.473933649289 0.524837075471 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 707.4 618.680645161 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 9.59856630824 42% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.94265232975 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.2492893076 48.9658058833 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.727272727 100.406767564 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.1818181818 20.6045352989 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.09090909091 5.45110844103 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => 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: 7.0 4.88709677419 143% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.304118066069 0.236089414692 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0938666040992 0.076458572812 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0674067963263 0.0737576698707 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.221167756326 0.150856017488 147% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0424888921971 0.0645574589148 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 11.7677419355 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 58.1214874552 75% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.1575268817 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.17 10.9000537634 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.02 8.01818996416 100% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 86.8835125448 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.002688172 80% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.247311828 127% => 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.