Professional workers like doctors, nurses and teachers make a greater contribution to society and so should be paid more than sports and entertainment personalities.
Recently, the phenomenon of professional workers contribution to society and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of achieving more payment is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. Therefore, I am inclined to believe that sports personalities can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, professional staffs can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in that fact that the merits of workers' capabilities and workers' wages are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment, which discovered the role of salary in having better life. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both entertainment personalities and well-known personalities evidently could be seen.
Within the realm of science, having greater contributions might increase the consequences of life expectancy. Moreover, the fundamental aspects of the payment amount relate to this reality that the demerits of professional job seekers would pertain to increasing the salary. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of contributing in society is negatively correlated to number of personalities. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of professional jobs.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that benefits of having more sports personalities far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of workers skills prove the significance of having better contribution in society, but also pinpoint wonderful implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 42, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'workers'' or 'worker's'?
Suggestion: workers'; worker's
...ecently, the phenomenon of professional workers contribution to society and its corresp...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, if, moreover, so, therefore, thus, well, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 5.94088669951 185% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 20.9802955665 91% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 31.9359605911 116% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.75862068966 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1561.0 1207.87684729 129% => OK
No of words: 268.0 242.827586207 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.82462686567 5.00649968141 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.04607285448 3.92707691288 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.42603763918 2.71678728327 126% => OK
Unique words: 170.0 139.433497537 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.634328358209 0.580463131201 109% => OK
syllable_count: 496.8 379.143842365 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.57093596059 121% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 2.0 1.56157635468 128% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.5024630542 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.6805829842 50.4703680194 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.083333333 104.977214359 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3333333333 20.9669160288 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.33333333333 7.25397266985 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 6.9802955665 100% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.205139547033 0.242375264174 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0652908555019 0.0925447433944 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0385749794508 0.071462118173 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111581231619 0.151781067708 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0208780089513 0.0609392437508 34% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.1 12.6369458128 135% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 23.77 53.1260098522 45% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 10.9458128079 141% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.77 11.5310837438 145% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.44 8.32886699507 125% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 55.0591133005 176% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 9.94827586207 156% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.3980295567 104% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.5123152709 162% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.5 Out of 90
---------------------
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.