The reading and the lecture are both about the working days of employees. The author of the reading believes that employees want to work four days a week, but the lecturer casts doubt on the claims made in the article. He thinks that employees should work a five-day week.
First of all, the author points out that the shortened workweek would increase company profits. It is mentioned that the four-day employees would be energetic more than the five-day employees and can work effectively equal to the five-day employees, while they are paid only 80 percent of the normal rate. This point is challenged by the lecturer. He states that less employees' compensations do not mean more profits. Furthermore, he argues that the company need to spend more money for additional training, medical benefits, and computer equipment.
Secondly, the author contends that the four working days would reduce unemployment rates. The article notes that new employees could be hired at the 80 percent rate because of working time reducing. The lecture rebuts this argument. He points that they have to be many more job available. He elaborates on this by mentioning that the five working days are less expectation for employees.
Finally, the author states that the option of a four-day workweek would be better for individual employees to improve the quality of their lives. It is mentioned that employees would have more time to balance their lives. This goes against the lecturer, who states that this way is the risks to reduce many qualities. In other words, this situation may cause to decrease the job abilities, lose employees’ jobs or pass over the promotions.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 364, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun employees is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...llenged by the lecturer. He states that less employees compensations do not mean mor...
^^^^
Line 7, column 360, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'decreasing'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'cause' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: decreasing
...n other words, this situation may cause to decrease the job abilities, lose employees'...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, may, second, secondly, while, first of all, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 22.412803532 134% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 26.0 30.3222958057 86% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1394.0 1373.03311258 102% => OK
No of words: 274.0 270.72406181 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08759124088 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0685311056 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63986455398 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 143.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.521897810219 0.540411800872 97% => OK
syllable_count: 410.4 419.366225166 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 3.25607064018 307% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 43.3983719179 49.2860985944 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 82.0 110.228320801 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.1176470588 21.698381199 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.41176470588 7.06452816374 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.568623415844 0.272083759551 209% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.176915877508 0.0996497079465 178% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.130455767816 0.0662205650399 197% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.360335504157 0.162205337803 222% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0657543287069 0.0443174109184 148% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.6 13.3589403974 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 53.8541721854 118% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 11.0289183223 76% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.95 12.2367328918 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.83 8.42419426049 93% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 63.6247240618 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.