No one can cast a shadow of doubt on the fact that a job is an inevitable and critical juncture in the life of most people, since leading an even simple life is not feasible without jobs in today’s world. So controversial is the topic in which a question always raises that whether a job with long hours in three days a week is better than a job with shorter hours in five days or not. Personally speaking, I agree with the former idea. In the ensuing paragraph, I will delve into the most outstanding reasons to substantiate my viewpoint.
First and foremost, working a few days a week gives more free time to spend doing leisure activities, and to fulfil personal interests; as a result, it makes people live healthier. In this progressive world, all individuals are engaged in hectic lives, so they cannot allocate enough time to personal interests, and living this way can cause mental and physical diseases in the long run, such as depression or spinal cord diseases in case of physical disorders. If a person can work fewer days a week, s/he will have a plethora of free hours to spend with her or his family members and friends or doing exercises. Therefore, s/he will be immune from the aforementioned diseases. Generally, the more people can respect or meet their interests, the more they feel satisfied and live a healthier life.
Another reason which deserves some words here is that by working more hours, one can finish specific tasks faster and more efficient. Dividing a job to one or two parts leads to lack of concentration on the topic and reduce efficiency. As a case in point, when I was an intern in the Iranian national organization of sports biomechanics, I was assigned with a project in which I had to process and analyze the data collected from the national basketball team. First, I planned to accomplish the project in a week, but every day I forgot about the progress I had made the day before. Therefore, I had to review the formulas every day. After three days, I decided to stay a few hours more and finish the work, and surprisingly I could finish the analyze in one day. Had I not stayed long hours, I could not have finished the job in time.
In conclusion, owing to the mentioned reasons, one can conclude that working longer hours and fewer days can be beneficial not only to have a healthier life but also to accomplish tasks effectively.
- TPO 17 Integrated Writing Task 89
- TPO 33 Integrate writing : Carved stone balls are a curious type of artifact found at a number of locations in Scotland. They date from the late Neolithic period, around 4,000 years ago. They are round in shape; they were carved from several types of ston 83
- tpo 41 regulation rules for handling coal ash 80
- Integrated Writing Task: Chaco Canyon: How the buildings were used? Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on the specific theories discussed on the reading passage. 90
- TPO 6 Task 2: Do you agree or disagree with the following statement. Life is easier and more comfortable today than it was when your grandparents were children. 90
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 741, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...e work, and surprisingly I could finish the analyze in one day. Had I not stayed long hours...
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, so, therefore, in conclusion, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 15.1003584229 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 9.8082437276 133% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 13.8261648746 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.0286738351 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 28.0 43.0788530466 65% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 52.1666666667 102% => 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: 1968.0 1977.66487455 100% => OK
No of words: 423.0 407.700716846 104% => OK
Chars per words: 4.6524822695 4.8611393121 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.53508145475 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70505788516 2.67179642975 101% => OK
Unique words: 220.0 212.727598566 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.520094562648 0.524837075471 99% => OK
syllable_count: 621.0 618.680645161 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 9.59856630824 83% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.51792114695 171% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.6003584229 83% => 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: 24.0 20.1344086022 119% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.5021728097 48.9658058833 130% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.764705882 100.406767564 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.8823529412 20.6045352989 121% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.23529411765 5.45110844103 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.85842293907 26% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.274842290268 0.236089414692 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0882207555965 0.076458572812 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0740305922107 0.0737576698707 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.163373616192 0.150856017488 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0444662406014 0.0645574589148 69% => OK
automated_readability_index: 12.9 11.7677419355 110% => 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: 9.99 10.9000537634 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.37 8.01818996416 104% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 86.8835125448 109% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.002688172 135% => 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: 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.