In the past it was easier to identify what type of career or job would lead to a secure, successful future.
Choosing a major career is an essential step of every person who reaches adulthood; therefore, people usually decide jobs which guarantee their stable life with high salaries. I agree with the notion that in the past, it is easier to consider what type of job would bring back a prospective life due to some rational reasons.
First of all, the number of pofessions, in the past, were so limited that people found it easier for them to possess an appropriate jobs. Unlike today's situation when there are a multitude of different work for people to choose, jobs in the past were always in a vicious circle. Specifically, if some people wanted to have an affluent life, they would likely to go for doctor, engineer, and bussiness men now that these careers are reputed for their noble future security. On the other hand, juvenile who live in the modern world are inclined to be drowned in the huge number of jobs provided in this day and age. They seem not to figure out their interest and ardor when standing in front of so many choices. To illustrate, my younger brother is now still confused whenever he is asked about his future career. His reaction is totally contravened from my older sister in the past: she always said that she wanted to be a doctor to achieve a successful future.
Secondly, the process of choosing a secure career is more arduous in the present due to severe competitions, which originates from the growing population. Young people have to learn a myriad of skills in order to meet the demands of their work; however, they will still be replaced if their is somebody who has more vigorous talent than them. As a result, current jobs may not be the permenant jobs. However, in the past, when the competitions were not so intense, people easily captivated their opportunities to get a good profession, even promoted easily. For example, my aunt used to narrate that she got quickly accepted as a teacher when she applied to work as a highschool teacher because there were not so many candidates at that time, making her the more bombastic during the interview time.
In conclusion, it is deniable that people in the past made no great effort to identify a secure career due to the jobs' restriction and less competitive rivalry.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 133, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'job'?
Suggestion: job
...sier for them to possess an appropriate jobs. Unlike todays situation when there are...
^^^^
Line 2, column 145, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'todays'' or 'today's'?
Suggestion: todays'; today's
... to possess an appropriate jobs. Unlike todays situation when there are a multitude of...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 285, Rule ID: THEIR_IS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'there'?
Suggestion: there
...however, they will still be replaced if their is somebody who has more vigorous talen...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 161, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...striction and less competitive rivalry.
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, for example, in conclusion, as a result, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 15.1003584229 126% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 9.8082437276 41% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 13.8261648746 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.0286738351 145% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 43.0788530466 81% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 52.1666666667 109% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.0752688172 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1861.0 1977.66487455 94% => OK
No of words: 393.0 407.700716846 96% => OK
Chars per words: 4.73536895674 4.8611393121 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45244063426 4.48103885553 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.56578147847 2.67179642975 96% => OK
Unique words: 222.0 212.727598566 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.564885496183 0.524837075471 108% => OK
syllable_count: 595.8 618.680645161 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 9.59856630824 94% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.6003584229 73% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 26.0 20.1344086022 129% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 42.352279225 48.9658058833 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.066666667 100.406767564 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.2 20.6045352989 127% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.13333333333 5.45110844103 168% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.5376344086 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.85842293907 52% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.88709677419 20% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.227911410941 0.236089414692 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0730196439659 0.076458572812 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0670111948794 0.0737576698707 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.152313930264 0.150856017488 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.060486196409 0.0645574589148 94% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 11.7677419355 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 58.1214874552 92% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.1575268817 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.51 10.9000537634 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.94 8.01818996416 111% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 86.8835125448 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 10.002688172 125% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.0537634409 123% => 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: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.