One challenge for many workers today is making sure that they have the most up-to-date skills. In response to this, the government decides to give money to all adults over the age of 25 to pay for one training course that can upgrade their skills. Do you think this is an effective way for the government to spend public money?
Most people in the world pursue higher salaries to have better living standards. In order to achieve this goal, it is necessary to upgrade their skills to meet the needs of the current industries. Personally, I believe that spending public money to provide skill training courses to people who are over the age of 25 is a great practice for the government. There are several reasons why I feel this way, which I will elaborate on in the following essay.
To begin with, the training courses can improve workers' work efficiency by providing them an opportunity to gain the latest knowledge. Nowadays, technologies and industries develop rapidly, so employees are required to learn more skills to adapt to this working environment. Take software industries for instance. "Scrum" is a popular software management tool which can help engineers develop projects efficiently. However, in traditional companies, senior workers who don't know how to implement this tool are still using old software skills. Inevitably, those companies cannot be able to survive in the highly competitive world because they always finish their products slower than their competitors. Accordingly, if the government could provide the old workers courses about the Scrum framework, it would be beneficial not only for them to work more efficiently, but also for traditional firms to make greater profits.
Furthermore, it is a great way to improve citizens' average living standards. Not every family can afford their children's tuition fees and learn in schools. When those students grow up, they won’t have any specialized skills to get high salary jobs. My friend Kevin has suffered from this issue. He was in a poor family and his parents didn’t have enough money to afford him to receive a complete education process. As a result, lack of any professional skills made him end up being a part-time job worker in a restaurant when he was at the age of 30. With little salary, he couldn't even buy a car until today. To solve this problem, it is a good idea for the government to provide courses to people who are over the age of 25. By doing this, poor people, including Kevin, can acquire at least one useful skill allowing them to find positions with higher pay and having higher living standards.
In conclusion, I strongly feel that it is a nice idea for the government to spend money to help adults upgrade their skills. This is because it can not only improve people’s work performance, but also can improve their living qualities.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 480, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...aditional companies, senior workers who dont know how to implement this tool are sti...
^^^^
Line 5, column 575, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
...t the age of 30. With little salary, he couldnt even buy a car until today. To solve th...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, but, furthermore, however, if, so, still, at least, for instance, i feel, in conclusion, 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: 10.0 9.8082437276 102% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 13.8261648746 43% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.0286738351 82% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 43.0788530466 93% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 52.1666666667 104% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.0752688172 136% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2116.0 1977.66487455 107% => OK
No of words: 420.0 407.700716846 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.0380952381 4.8611393121 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52701905584 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77659884279 2.67179642975 104% => OK
Unique words: 239.0 212.727598566 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.569047619048 0.524837075471 108% => OK
syllable_count: 649.8 618.680645161 105% => 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: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.3285565533 48.9658058833 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.1818181818 100.406767564 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0909090909 20.6045352989 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.09090909091 5.45110844103 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 11.8709677419 76% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.88709677419 184% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.345165323074 0.236089414692 146% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0845419883392 0.076458572812 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0605425541287 0.0737576698707 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.203057357192 0.150856017488 135% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0359274679652 0.0645574589148 56% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 11.7677419355 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 58.1214874552 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.1575268817 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.95 10.9000537634 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.19 8.01818996416 102% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 86.8835125448 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => 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: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.