Four-day workweek
The lecturer discusses how four-day workweek can influence world economy, individual companies and their employees. The information he presents directly contradicts to facts outlined in the passage.
First, the lecturer states that shortened workweek wouldn't change or increase company profits at all. He explains that even if employees work more carefully and alertly and get only 80% of their normal payment, the company will still need more employees to cover up the lack of workers and that will cost a lot of money; work space, medical insurance and many other things will make the company decrease their profit. On the other hand, according to the reading shortened workweek would increase company profits, because the quality of the work would have increased, and also because they would pay their workers only 80% of their normal payment.
Second, the speaker states that unfortunately shortened workweek will not deal with the problem of unemployment rates. As the lecturer mentioned before, they will need more employees which costs lots of money, so the company will higher their expectations of their workers. They will make their employees fit the work that they previously did for five days, in four days. However, the reading passage indicates that four-day workweek would reduce unemployment rates by stating that, for every four employees that work four days a week, a new employee could be hired for four-day workweek.
Third, the lecturer explains that four-day workweek could harm individual employees, because in case of economical crisis, these workers would be the first to be fired. These employees will also have the least chances of career advancement, they can also decrease their job stability. In contrast, the reading says that the four-day workweek would be better for the employees, as they can have more free time, which they can spend on pursuing private interests or enjoying leisure activities.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 52, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wouldn't
...lecturer states that shortened workweek wouldnt change or increase company profits at a...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 105, Rule ID: ECONOMICAL_ECONOMIC[1]
Message: Did you mean 'economic' (=connected with economy)?
Suggestion: economic
...ndividual employees, because in case of economical crisis, these workers would be the firs...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, second, so, still, third, in contrast, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 10.4613686534 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 5.04856512141 436% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 22.412803532 134% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 25.0 30.3222958057 82% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1635.0 1373.03311258 119% => OK
No of words: 307.0 270.72406181 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.32573289902 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18585898806 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52538176866 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 157.0 145.348785872 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.511400651466 0.540411800872 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 468.9 419.366225166 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 21.2450331126 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.7337162826 49.2860985944 135% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.25 110.228320801 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5833333333 21.698381199 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.83333333333 7.06452816374 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.330212960753 0.272083759551 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.145232965163 0.0996497079465 146% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.173378146355 0.0662205650399 262% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.2416616355 0.162205337803 149% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.119775243258 0.0443174109184 270% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 13.3589403974 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.93 12.2367328918 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.53 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.498013245 114% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 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.