Nowadays everything is changing rapidly and for many people keeping up with this pace requires a great deal of effort. Although many people might believe that working slowly has privilege over doing thing faster, I would argue that sometimes it is better to take the risk and increase the pace of working. Despite possible demerits of this decision, I believe that the opportunities could be very limited thus perfectionism and work slowly to gain perfect results could lead to losing precious chances; besides that when you work faster you will have enough time to compensate for the possible mistakes.
First, the chances are usually limited in each person's life. Expecting everything to be perfect by doing things slowly, hoping for flawless and accurate results is not always possible. Work could involve unexpected intrinsic and inevitable mistakes, and once you try to be perfect you are actually missing other chances and losing your time. In addition, if you come up with an error, you will not be able to compensate for it. For instance, as I was doing my master's thesis, despite my classmates, I tried to not waste time on minute details and submit my thesis as soon as possible. However, it did not decrease the quality of my research. I just tried to be fast yet accurate. Therefore, I could finish my masters on time and submit for Ph.D. in my favorite major. In the contrary, my classmate, who was a perfectionist, paid so much attention to every single detail, hoping that it ends up with no error, but unfortunately in the meanwhile one of the lab's facilities, which her entire research was dependent on, broke and she much time and the opportunity of Ph.D. admission for the following semester. This experience, In my opinion, clearly indicates that one should try to avoid wasting time and be as fast as possible in the work in order to catch future chances.
Moreover, we can learn from our mistakes. The experience we gain by making mistakes enable us to avoid them in the future, which consequently increases the efficiency of our work. However, if we try to avoid mistakes by working slowly we might lose the chance of compensation for unavoidable mistakes. For instance, in the same example of my master's thesis, I found a few bugs in the code I was writing by running it many times. I wrote the initial code quite fast and then tried to detect its bugs by try and error. This actually saved me a lot of time. on the other hand, many of my friends first spent time to come up with a perfect and professional code and since the time was limited they had not enough time to evaluate their final outputs. If I had wasted time to make everything perfect, I would never be able to become aware of the variety of possible bugs in programming.
To sum up, based on the arguments explored above, since chances are usually very limited and making mistakes could be beneficial to the efficiency of our work, I believe that it is better to take the risks and work with higher speed to have time for compensating for possible mistakes and gain experience through our mistakes.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 48, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'persons'' or 'person's'?
Suggestion: persons'; person's
...the chances are usually limited in each persons life. Expecting everything to be perfec...
^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 503, Rule ID: TRY_AND[1]
Message: "Try and" is common in colloquial speech, but "'try to'" is recommended for writing.
Suggestion: try to
...st and then tried to detect its bugs by try and error. This actually saved me a lot of ...
^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 556, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: On
.... This actually saved me a lot of time. on the other hand, many of my friends firs...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, besides, but, consequently, first, however, if, moreover, so, then, therefore, thus, while, for instance, in addition, in my opinion, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 15.1003584229 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 9.8082437276 133% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 13.8261648746 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 62.0 43.0788530466 144% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 78.0 52.1666666667 150% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.0752688172 99% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2559.0 1977.66487455 129% => OK
No of words: 540.0 407.700716846 132% => OK
Chars per words: 4.73888888889 4.8611393121 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.82057051367 4.48103885553 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61707684657 2.67179642975 98% => OK
Unique words: 254.0 212.727598566 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.47037037037 0.524837075471 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 823.5 618.680645161 133% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 15.0 9.59856630824 156% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.994623655914 101% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.51792114695 171% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 11.0 4.94265232975 223% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.1344086022 119% => OK
Sentence length SD: 84.9421898696 48.9658058833 173% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.318181818 100.406767564 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5454545455 20.6045352989 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.81818181818 5.45110844103 143% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.85842293907 207% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.148849787884 0.236089414692 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.046033213089 0.076458572812 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.046168592167 0.0737576698707 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.11194415632 0.150856017488 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0257089992526 0.0645574589148 40% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 11.7677419355 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 58.1214874552 96% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.1575268817 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.51 10.9000537634 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.07 8.01818996416 101% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 86.8835125448 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 10.002688172 180% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.0537634409 115% => 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: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.