4-day workweek jobs
Both the reading and the lecture are about working four days of a week. The reading discusses that staff are eager to work four days in a week. On the other hand, the professor argues that four-day week work will be troublesome to staff.
First, the reading states that organizations can rich their economy by paying 80 percent of normal pay for working just four days in a week. However, the professor challenges this argument. He claims that employing staff to work four days in a week reduce the economy because employment of these staff will cause the organization to spend more and more money. The professor gives an example that employment of staff who works four days in a week will increase requirement for more offices and more computers.
Second, the reading states that abridged workweek would be beneficial for companies because employees who works four days in a week will not make mistakes, and they are astute. However, the professor challenges this argument. He claims that demand for working overtime will be increased in some situations. The professor gives an example of enhancing company’s expectation sometimes that want staff to work 5 days in week.
Third, the reading states that working four days in a week will develop the modality of employees’ life by spending more time with their families. In contrast the lecturer position is working four days in a week will boost risks for employees’ life. He notes that a shortened workweek will lessen job quality, and cause bad results for developing careers.
Finally, the reading argues that four-day week work is beneficial for both employees and companies, but the professor completely rejects and says shortened workweek will be disadvantageous both.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 156, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[2]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: contrast,
...nding more time with their families. In contrast the lecturer position is working four d...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, second, so, third, in contrast, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 30.3222958057 86% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1466.0 1373.03311258 107% => OK
No of words: 285.0 270.72406181 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.14385964912 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10876417139 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78317505812 2.5805825403 108% => OK
Unique words: 127.0 145.348785872 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.445614035088 0.540411800872 82% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 429.3 419.366225166 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.192133042 49.2860985944 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.7333333333 110.228320801 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0 21.698381199 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.53333333333 7.06452816374 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.202894479474 0.272083759551 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0854494155248 0.0996497079465 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0557562223472 0.0662205650399 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.139543664546 0.162205337803 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0360240173856 0.0443174109184 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.3589403974 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.96 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 63.6247240618 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.