tp01 the arguments about a four-day work week employment
The lecture apparently refutes the point illustrated in the reading material. According to the professor, the effect made in the reading about allowing four-day employment will not occur. On the contrary, the reading contends an opposite stands that allowing the workers to choose to participate in the company for a four days work week will benefit the economy.
The first point the professor uses to cast doubt on the reading is that it will cost the company more budget to hire more employees instead of saving them because of the extra cost of training, and expanding office space and more equipment for the people, which is extremely costly, which differs from the statement in the reading is that employees will feel more rest and alert so that the rate of errors would reduce eventually because the company can use the extra money to hire more workers.
Another evidence the speaker adopts to contradict the passage is that companies will expect the workers to have the ability to compact the five-day amount task into a four-day amount and increase the risk for workers to work overtime more often. However, the reading states that hiring more workers will reduce the rate of overworking and error-prone employees and also boost the employment rate in the country.
In conclusion, the point made in the lecture contrasts with what is presented in the reading. As the professor claims, opening a four-day workweek will reduce the workers' quality of life and harm their job availability because they will be the first ones who are going to leave the company during an economic downturn because business leaders are more willing to keep the ones who are more likely to work for five days a week, whereas the reading material holds that people will believe that it is worth to gain lower salary in exchange for more free time to spend with their relatives, interests, and activities.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, first, however, if, so, whereas, in conclusion, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1578.0 1373.03311258 115% => OK
No of words: 319.0 270.72406181 118% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94670846395 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22617688928 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.43174127555 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 145.348785872 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.501567398119 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 496.8 419.366225166 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 13.0662251656 61% => 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: 39.0 21.2450331126 184% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 165.068120408 49.2860985944 335% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 197.25 110.228320801 179% => OK
Words per sentence: 39.875 21.698381199 184% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.125 7.06452816374 143% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.166104084681 0.272083759551 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0937064279174 0.0996497079465 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0938707495993 0.0662205650399 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125204039457 0.162205337803 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.094991518814 0.0443174109184 214% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 21.8 13.3589403974 163% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.89 53.8541721854 59% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 18.5 11.0289183223 168% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.02 12.2367328918 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.23 8.42419426049 110% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 17.6 10.498013245 168% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.