The discussion surrounding what makes a good leader is far from trivial. Numerous scholars have attempted to define leadership and the process of leadership development. For instance, the renowned philosopher Socrates, in 1960, defined a leader as the highest-ranking figure in any community or organization, someone capable of shaping or dismantling a community. On the other hand, Nelson Mandela described a leader as an adept follower within society, someone who handles and executes challenging situations with great discretion. These and other definitions have faced criticism over time, highlighting the complexity of defining and nurturing leadership qualities.
The prompt for this essay suggests that successful leaders in our society are those who develop in response to the demands of their roles. However, I strongly disagree with this perspective for two essential reasons.
Firstly, leaders are not made overnight; they undergo a multifaceted development process, much like constructing a durable building. Building a lasting structure requires careful planning, acquiring the necessary materials, laying a solid foundation, and gradual construction. Similarly, leaders cannot be solely shaped by the immediate challenges they face. What if a leader encounters a situation beyond their capacity or knowledge? Relying solely on immediate demands for leadership development can be detrimental to the nation. History provides us with an example in the form of the Second World War conflict between the USA and Japan in 1956. A mere 24 hours after Japan's Commander Lin Ho ordered the launch of their RPG missiles on American soil, the USA's Army Commander at the time, 5-star Major General Richard, authorized the first use of an atomic weapon on Hiroshima, effectively decimating 90% of the Japanese army. It's important to note that the development of the atomic bomb was not a swift reaction to the immediate demands of war. Rather, it was the result of years of gradual research and refinement by numerous scientists and engineers. This example underscores the notion that productive and successful leadership necessitates years of preparation, determination, and continuous development.
Secondly, the adage "one man cannot make a forest" aptly applies to leadership. Leaders need collaboration, mutual learning, and teamwork to overcome challenges and develop effective solutions. These qualities are what define great leaders. For instance, Professor John, the 2023 Nobel laureate in Medicine, developed an interest in molecular research during his undergraduate years in Australia, where he completed his elementary to master's level schooling. Although many assume that his groundbreaking research was conducted at Penn State University during his postdoctoral position in Professor Mathew's lab, Professor John himself stated that his initial interest was sparked during his undergraduate years in Australia. Moreover, his award-winning research was the product of a synergy between multiple laboratory methodologies. This example demonstrates the importance of building connections over time in achieving complex goals. Even when faced with urgent demands, the relationships and networks established over time can be instrumental in executing tasks successfully and making groundbreaking discoveries.
In conclusion, attributing the success of leaders solely to the immediate demands they face is a narrow perspective. True leadership is built through consistent, long-term development, not merely in response to situational demands. The examples of the atomic bomb's development, Professor John's research, and the production of face masks all emphasize the significance of gradual, deliberate development. A strong and effective leader is forged through years of preparation, learning, and adaptation.
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take In 66
- The primary goal of technological advancement should be to increase people s efficiency so that they have more leisure time 62
- Leaders are created by the demands that are placed on them 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 developing and supporting your position y 16
- The primary goal of technological advancement should be to increase people s efficiency so that they have more leisure time 58
- The primary goal of technological advancement should be to increase people s efficiency so that they have more leisure time 66
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, similarly, so, for instance, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.4196629213 40% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 14.8657303371 135% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 32.0 33.0505617978 97% => OK
Preposition: 72.0 58.6224719101 123% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 12.9106741573 194% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3285.0 2235.4752809 147% => OK
No of words: 556.0 442.535393258 126% => OK
Chars per words: 5.90827338129 5.05705443957 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.85588840946 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.24728061631 2.79657885939 116% => OK
Unique words: 325.0 215.323595506 151% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.584532374101 0.4932671777 119% => OK
syllable_count: 1017.0 704.065955056 144% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 29.0 20.2370786517 143% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 54.1201376426 60.3974514979 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.275862069 118.986275619 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.1724137931 23.4991977007 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.24137931034 5.21951772744 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 20.0 10.2758426966 195% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0997347742016 0.243740707755 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0277404525228 0.0831039109588 33% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0290859829484 0.0758088955206 38% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0661349438402 0.150359130593 44% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0346535582491 0.0667264976115 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 14.1392134831 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.27 48.8420337079 72% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.1743820225 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.0 12.1639044944 140% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.6 8.38706741573 126% => OK
difficult_words: 212.0 100.480337079 211% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => 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: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, similarly, so, for instance, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.4196629213 40% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 14.8657303371 135% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 32.0 33.0505617978 97% => OK
Preposition: 72.0 58.6224719101 123% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 12.9106741573 194% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3285.0 2235.4752809 147% => OK
No of words: 556.0 442.535393258 126% => OK
Chars per words: 5.90827338129 5.05705443957 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.85588840946 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.24728061631 2.79657885939 116% => OK
Unique words: 325.0 215.323595506 151% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.584532374101 0.4932671777 119% => OK
syllable_count: 1017.0 704.065955056 144% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 29.0 20.2370786517 143% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 54.1201376426 60.3974514979 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.275862069 118.986275619 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.1724137931 23.4991977007 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.24137931034 5.21951772744 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 20.0 10.2758426966 195% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0997347742016 0.243740707755 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0277404525228 0.0831039109588 33% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0290859829484 0.0758088955206 38% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0661349438402 0.150359130593 44% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0346535582491 0.0667264976115 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 14.1392134831 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.27 48.8420337079 72% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.1743820225 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.0 12.1639044944 140% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.6 8.38706741573 126% => OK
difficult_words: 212.0 100.480337079 211% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => 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: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.