In the past, it was easier to identify what type of career or job would lead to a secure, successful future.
Nowadays, it is a heated subject among youth that which career path would result in a prosperous, successful future. Many people in the past used to keep on with their family business, meaning they were less likely to take a risk. Others, however, would make innovative decisions based on their observations or luck. Any of these schemes could make a fortune by diligence and hard work. Nonetheless, these days, people cannot pave a deterministic road to the satisfaction of their ambitions. I believe the economic and social characteristics of the previous generations granted them insurance of success, which cannot be established today.
To begin with, budgeting was not as well-distributed as it is today. This is mainly because new industries were borning every minute, and there did not exist a suitable regularization for finances designated for each company. For example, with the advent of automobiles, many stock shareholders were investing more and more money on this invention. Therefore, with the money on their hand and their ignorance toward other businesses (as trains or ships), people had a tendency to build their plans upon the new thriving business: automobiles. Thus, many young people were to study mechanics related to automobile design, and many businesspeople decided to change their trades in an automobile-centric way. With this in mind, people knew there is always a demand for more automobile advancements and its related matters, so they established their financial future based on this knowledge. On the contrary, today's technology has reached a block that obscured the view of people regarding their future. People are dealing with more doubts while choosing a major of study or applying for a job position. We can safely say, the previous generation exploited the immaturity of the local and global business and society.
Besides, with recent, abrupt growth in population, governments and private companies failed to provide enough job opportunities for applicants. This means a lot of people with relevant degrees and even a significant background cannot guarantee a career. Earth's population increases 13% in the last twenty years, whereas the resources are in a daily decay. With limited resources, comes limited budget and as a consequence, limited positions. So as the number of competitors grows, people cannot make a secure career view. Whereas, people who had persuaded an academical degree in the past would be able to guarantee themselves a job. In other words, for a while, education was equal to employment. As a result, people were more motivated, academically speaking. However, today's obligations regarding financial successful require something more than pure knowledge; Something no one was able to find a formula for by now.
All in all, people in the past were more capable of an accurate foreseeing about their future. They had more resources as well as less complicated economic and social difficulties. Nowadays, people should rely on more creativity and innovations to obtain as much.
- TPO 11 85
- TPO 12 73
- Workers are more satisfied when they have many different task to do during the workday than when they dpo similar task all day long. 73
- TPO 35 3
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? “It is better for children to grow up in the countryside than in a large city.” Use specific reasons and examples to develop your essay. 76
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 523, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT
Message: “Whereas” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...eople cannot make a secure career view. Whereas, people who had persuaded an academical...
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, however, if, nonetheless, regarding, so, therefore, thus, well, whereas, while, for example, as a result, as well as, in other words, on the contrary, 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 : 17.0 13.8261648746 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 11.0286738351 45% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 29.0 43.0788530466 67% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 52.1666666667 119% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.0752688172 161% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2574.0 1977.66487455 130% => OK
No of words: 481.0 407.700716846 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.35135135135 4.8611393121 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68313059816 4.48103885553 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0257373712 2.67179642975 113% => OK
Unique words: 270.0 212.727598566 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.561330561331 0.524837075471 107% => OK
syllable_count: 821.7 618.680645161 133% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.94265232975 162% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 20.6003584229 131% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.1344086022 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.1202910331 48.9658058833 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.3333333333 100.406767564 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.8148148148 20.6045352989 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.59259259259 5.45110844103 121% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 11.8709677419 118% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.85842293907 207% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.107968365859 0.236089414692 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0326787551368 0.076458572812 43% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0426682904546 0.0737576698707 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0760913990006 0.150856017488 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0407111224294 0.0645574589148 63% => OK
automated_readability_index: 12.7 11.7677419355 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 58.1214874552 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.1575268817 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.45 10.9000537634 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.21 8.01818996416 115% => OK
difficult_words: 144.0 86.8835125448 166% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.002688172 90% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.0537634409 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => 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.