The reading and the article are both about the shortening of workweek from five days to four days by giving less pay that is accepted by employees. The article states that this application would be highly beneficial and provides three reasons of support. However, the professor explains that these are somehow missing reasons and refutes each of the author’s reasons.
First, the reading claims that company profits increase with this change.The professor rebuts this point by saying that it may be more costly for a company to hire new workers and providing a training program for them. He also notes that the health issues and creating new office areas for the new hired workers may create important additional costs that causes to end up with decreased profits for the company.
Second, the article posits that the country as a whole may benefit from this amendment. However, the professor says that it may not be the case that unemployment reduces. Instead of hiring new workers, the company may expect the same job from the same workers but at the less time. He also states that the company may ask their employees to work overtime. These creates an extra pressure on the workers and this make them feel more unpleasant.
Third, the reading says that individual employees could also increase their life quality by spending more time with their families or pursuing their hobbies. The professor opposes this point by explaining that it includes some risk that may cause to reduce the life quality of the workers. He elaborates on this by bringing up the point that working less may decrease the worker’s job ability and this prevents them from advancing their career. Additionally, he states that company may prefer five day workers to promote them and this is an opportunity cost of choosing less day to work.
- shortening workweek 73
- topic: shortening the employees workweek to 4 days instead of five days 83
- shortened work week 3
- shortened work week 3
- 8-)“Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain.”Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 365, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ns and refutes each of the author's reasons. First, the reading claims th...
^^
Line 3, column 74, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...mpany profits increase with this change.The professor rebuts this point by saying t...
^^^
Line 3, column 323, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...eas for the new hired workers may create important additional costs that causes t...
^^
Line 3, column 364, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'ending'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'cause' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: ending
... important additional costs that causes to end up with decreased profits for the compa...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 29, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...leasant. Third, the reading says that individual employees could also increase...
^^
Line 7, column 249, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'reducing'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'cause' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: reducing
...at it includes some risk that may cause to reduce the life quality of the workers. He ela...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, second, so, third, as for
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 43.0 22.412803532 192% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1530.0 1373.03311258 111% => OK
No of words: 306.0 270.72406181 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.0 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18244613648 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.47296458665 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.509803921569 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 458.1 419.366225166 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.5221234367 49.2860985944 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.285714286 110.228320801 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8571428571 21.698381199 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.35714285714 7.06452816374 62% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 4.19205298013 143% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => 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: 0.0561151484216 0.272083759551 21% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0227261006169 0.0996497079465 23% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0367400729279 0.0662205650399 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0355850720957 0.162205337803 22% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0219454071274 0.0443174109184 50% => 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: 13.1 13.3589403974 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.72 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.6 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 63.6247240618 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.