Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
In the past it was easier to identify what type of career or job would lead to a secure, successful future.
In today's world, people are trying and doing their best to live in quiet, convenient, and healthy life. But by the time passes, achieving to this goal may become more intricate than before, so from my point of view, I strongly agree with the statement. Identifying what type of career or job would lead to a secure, successful future becomes more and more difficult by comparison to that time. In this regard some reasons support that idea, two of which are of great importance, are elaborated upon hereunder.
To begin with, one of the most important difference between today and that time is the limitation of majors. People's alternatives were restricted and everyone would choose between some familiar options, however, nowadays they are confusing by the numerous type of jobs. It is crystal clear that situation was effected by the population. The number of individuals who lived in that time were less than today's. The more population, the more variation in senses. Different senses plus the demands made them eager to find a new way to support their need. But in the past no one concerned about any variations, so they clearly knew what they want to be. A saying comes to mind, which equivalent in English may sounds this: "To help people to reduce their wasting of time, restrict them."
Secondly, dependency is playing an important role nowadays. In the past, most of the people wanted to continue their family's business, so from childhood, they understood what they would be in the future. Without any shadow of doubt, they could be more successful than the others who wanted to ran a new business. For instance, a person of whom father was a farmer, children worked on father's field and continue farming to make more land for cultivating. In other words, their paternal attempt paves the way for them and they did not need to start from the "first stair". Apparently, offspring nowadays, because of changing in the manner and also diversion of fields, do not have any enthusiasm to continue their paternal business, while can be found ones rely on this inveterate method and they are more successful than the other ones. In summary, more children want to be independent by the contrast of the past, so this leads them to be more confused to choose the best for their future.
In summary, by taking to account all the mentioned factors above, people were really convenient with choosing their career because of the limitation of majors and dependency on their family. Both these factors had lead them to be more successful rather than being confuse between variation and "colorful" jobs like today's world.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 793, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ir wasting of time, restrict them.' Secondly, dependency is playing an impor...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 215, Rule ID: HAD_VBP[1]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'leaded', 'led'.
Suggestion: leaded; led
...on their family. Both these factors had lead them to be more successful rather than ...
^^^^
Line 7, column 215, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[3]
Message: Possible agreement error – use past participle here: 'leaded', 'led'.
Suggestion: leaded; led
...on their family. Both these factors had lead them to be more successful rather than ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, first, however, if, may, really, second, secondly, so, thus, while, for instance, in summary, in other words, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 15.1003584229 139% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 9.8082437276 92% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 13.8261648746 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.0286738351 91% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 43.0788530466 84% => OK
Preposition: 78.0 52.1666666667 150% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.0752688172 136% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2212.0 1977.66487455 112% => OK
No of words: 444.0 407.700716846 109% => OK
Chars per words: 4.98198198198 4.8611393121 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.5903493882 4.48103885553 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67576288268 2.67179642975 100% => OK
Unique words: 240.0 212.727598566 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.540540540541 0.524837075471 103% => OK
syllable_count: 680.4 618.680645161 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 9.59856630824 52% => OK
Article: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 11.0 4.94265232975 223% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.2271266681 48.9658058833 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.6 100.406767564 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2 20.6045352989 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.3 5.45110844103 134% => 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: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.16774839452 0.236089414692 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0515544027389 0.076458572812 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0678970102045 0.0737576698707 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.114234831212 0.150856017488 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0610819807132 0.0645574589148 95% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 11.7677419355 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 58.1214874552 99% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.1575268817 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.6 10.9000537634 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.5 8.01818996416 106% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 86.8835125448 122% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.002688172 105% => 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: 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.