Claim: In any field — business, politics, education, government — those in power should step down after five years.
Reason: The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.
The given statement approves of a change in power every five years with the reasoning that a new leadership would help revitalise the enterprise which in turn would guarantee success. I disagree with the necessity of change in power expressed in the claim while I partially disagree with the reasoning for the same.
I feel that the important task here is to make sure that the head of any organisation and at any level within the organisation should be someone who is not only technically knowledgable but also pragmatic and is aware of current scenarios as well as recent developments in one’s respective field. This is all that any organisation looks for in any of its members and demands the same from new recruits. Now, in case of someone who has been in power is also armed with valuable experience. Simply bringing new ideas is not any confirmation of growth. More often than not, we see newbies to be very enthusiastic and confident about the capability of their ideas to change the organisation for better. However they are mere presumptive fledglings and often are not aware of the whole picture. This is very experience becomes quite a valuable asset and simply replacing it with a seemingly better leadership can prove to be detrimental in the future.
However, I am not undermining the importance of bringing in new perspective in any institution. It is quite important as it helps make the institution more dynamic in nature. A lot many times, a dying company has been saved not by the experienced leaders but by the new ones simply because of their different perspective thus tackling the problem from a newfound direction. Thus a balance between the new and the experienced is the way to go. So, what I feel is a better alternative is to give the current authority another chance to prove itself by allowing it to be part of the race along with newcomers. One should also take into account how the current leader performed in his/her tenure and then, based upon a complete evaluation of all, choose the most suitable candidate.
Such a procedure obviates the assumption of “new is always better”. It is completely reasonable if someone already in power showcases more mettle and more worthiness for the job. This is what I actually happens even in our elections. Following a five year tenure, the public again gets to evaluate all candidates, including the ones in power.
Therefore, while I believe in revitalisation of any organisation, I also feel strongly about not compromising experience for the same. A more balanced approach of taking both into consideration is the way to go.
- Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be 66
- 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 position 50
- Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your rea
- Some people believe that government funding of the arts is necessary to ensure that the arts can flourish and be available to all people. Others believe that government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of the arts.Write a response in which you 62
- To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In deve 58
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 705, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
... to change the organisation for better. However they are mere presumptive fledglings a...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 726, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...sation for better. However they are mere presumptive fledglings and often are not...
^^
Line 9, column 375, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
... the problem from a newfound direction. Thus a balance between the new and the exper...
^^^^
Line 13, column 214, Rule ID: NON3PRS_VERB[1]
Message: The pronoun 'I' must be used with a non-third-person form of a verb: 'happen'
Suggestion: happen
...ss for the job. This is what I actually happens even in our elections. Following a five...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, however, if, look, so, then, therefore, thus, well, while, as to, i feel, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.5258426966 118% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.4196629213 40% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 29.0 33.0505617978 88% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 58.6224719101 106% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 12.9106741573 147% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2193.0 2235.4752809 98% => OK
No of words: 443.0 442.535393258 100% => OK
Chars per words: 4.95033860045 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.58776254615 4.55969084622 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95382962056 2.79657885939 106% => OK
Unique words: 229.0 215.323595506 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.516930022573 0.4932671777 105% => OK
syllable_count: 727.2 704.065955056 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.2310034431 60.3974514979 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.428571429 118.986275619 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0952380952 23.4991977007 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 5.21951772744 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.83258426966 207% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.188147211055 0.243740707755 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0521078241831 0.0831039109588 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0507407414462 0.0758088955206 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.101660242579 0.150359130593 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0467464615039 0.0667264976115 70% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 14.1392134831 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.8420337079 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.43 12.1639044944 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.49 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 100.480337079 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 11.8971910112 160% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 Out of 6
---------------------
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.