In the past it was easier to identify what type of career or job would lead to a secure, successful future.
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
Job plays a pivotal role in human beings lives. People consider a lot about the question of whether or not in the past people could be easier to recognize what kinds of careers. Therefore, to think about this subject is an interesting thing. In my view, people in the past was able to predict the future and the success of a job due to the fact that there were very few job and the trends of people were consistent. I will explore my ideas in the following essay.
First of all, there were few kinds of jobs in the past than today. We all acknowledge that the rhythm of life of people in the past was not dynamic as we are today. Their lives were covered around small villages. Likewise, there were very few factories or companies. Most man did their job as farmers and woman stayed at home to weave or just do house works and taught their children. Most successful people were the owners of lands or mangers of companies. Therefore, it was easy to identify and predict the future and the secure of their jobs.
Secondly, the trend of people was probably constant. It is true the inventions of technology and computer have changed our lives so much. People can approach to the advanced things and it also helps people to create many news jobs, such as selling goods online and teaching online and many other technological jobs. However, looking back in the past, people had no internet, no computer, and no television as well. The trades of merchants were only in short distance due to the fact of lack of transportation. Therefore, people did not have various jobs as people have to day. It also affect the thinking of people about a secure job. They just concerned to collect enough food to eat and clothes to wear.
In conclusion, people have their own ideas of whether or not people in the past could be easily to identify what kinds of jobs would lead to a secure and successful future. In my opinion, they could completely predict this because their lives were stable and the trend of people about job was not dynamic as we are today.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 77, Rule ID: WHETHER[3]
Message: Wordiness: Shorten this phrase to the shortest possible suggestion.
Suggestion: whether; the question whether
...ings lives. People consider a lot about the question of whether or not in the past people could be easi...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 367, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun job seems to be countable; consider using: 'few jobs'.
Suggestion: few jobs
...ob due to the fact that there were very few job and the trends of people were consisten...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 586, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'affects'?
Suggestion: affects
...ous jobs as people have to day. It also affect the thinking of people about a secure j...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 47, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...clusion, people have their own ideas of whether or not people in the past could be easily to i...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, likewise, look, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, in conclusion, in short, such as, first of all, in my opinion, in my view, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 15.1003584229 126% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 9.8082437276 61% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 13.8261648746 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 11.0286738351 18% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 43.0788530466 56% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 52.1666666667 113% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 8.0752688172 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1676.0 1977.66487455 85% => OK
No of words: 370.0 407.700716846 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.52972972973 4.8611393121 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38581623665 4.48103885553 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.37354545825 2.67179642975 89% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 212.727598566 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.472972972973 0.524837075471 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 522.0 618.680645161 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.51630824373 92% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 9.59856630824 83% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.51792114695 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.1344086022 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 42.084920053 48.9658058833 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 76.1818181818 100.406767564 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.8181818182 20.6045352989 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.54545454545 5.45110844103 138% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.5376344086 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.88709677419 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.145110285967 0.236089414692 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0453025506884 0.076458572812 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0538010187746 0.0737576698707 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111730315416 0.150856017488 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0537731058529 0.0645574589148 83% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 8.3 11.7677419355 71% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 72.16 58.1214874552 124% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.2 10.1575268817 71% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 8.7 10.9000537634 80% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.2 8.01818996416 90% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 86.8835125448 75% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.002688172 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.0537634409 84% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 10.247311828 78% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
We are expecting: No. of Words: 350 while No. of Different Words: 200
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: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 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.