In our increasingly interconnected world, the global availability of similar products has become a defining characteristic of our time. This phenomenon, driven by technological advancements and globalization, has sparked a significant debate. While some may argue that this trend is homogenizing the world, I firmly believe that it represents a highly positive development, for two key reasons.
First and foremost, the accessibility of products to people across the globe is a giant leap towards equality. It breaks down economic and geographical barriers, ensuring that individuals from all nations can partake in the benefits of technological progress. In this age of instant connectivity, anyone, regardless of their location, can acquire the latest technical marvels as soon as they hit the market. For example, a farmer in a remote village in India can now access cutting-edge agricultural tools, putting them on par with their urban counterparts. This equalizing effect promotes inclusivity and empowers people worldwide to embrace the latest advancements.
Furthermore, the interconnectedness fostered by the global availability of products enables countries to collaborate efficiently in solving shared challenges. As our world becomes more complex, nations often encounter similar problems, albeit at different stages. By allowing countries to access products and solutions developed elsewhere, we can save valuable time and resources. For instance, if one nation pioneers a groundbreaking technology to combat climate change, sharing this innovation globally ensures rapid implementation and benefits all. This collaborative approach fosters efficiency and accelerates progress on a global scale.
To conclude, the universal accessibility of similar products is an undeniably positive development. It promotes equality, ensuring that the fruits of progress are not confined to a select few. Additionally, it facilitates global cooperation in tackling common challenges, ultimately leading to a more efficient and interconnected world. While some may lament the perceived homogenization, the benefits of this trend far outweigh the drawbacks, making it a beacon of progress in our ever-evolving society.
- Financial education should be a mandatory component of the school program To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement 50
- The diagram below shows how geothermal energy is used to produce electricity Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 73
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the pos 66
- Laws should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances times and places 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 50
- The pie graphs below show the results of a survey of children s activities The first graph shows the cultural and leisure activities that boys participate in whereas the second graph shows the activities in which girls participate 67
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, if, may, so, while, for example, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 13.1623246493 30% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 24.0651302605 108% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 41.998997996 88% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1906.0 1615.20841683 118% => OK
No of words: 317.0 315.596192385 100% => OK
Chars per words: 6.01261829653 5.12529762239 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21953715646 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.51104526091 2.80592935109 125% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 176.041082164 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.630914826498 0.561755894193 112% => OK
syllable_count: 608.4 506.74238477 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 26.1679430922 49.4020404114 53% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 112.117647059 106.682146367 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.6470588235 20.7667163134 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.82352941176 7.06120827912 54% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.205265491294 0.244688304435 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0619655470057 0.084324248473 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0479847669563 0.0667982634062 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.123568480433 0.151304729494 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0395494401738 0.056905535591 70% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 13.0946893788 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 27.83 50.2224549098 55% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.9 11.3001002004 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.58 12.4159519038 142% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.71 8.58950901804 125% => OK
difficult_words: 124.0 78.4519038076 158% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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:
first, furthermore, if, may, so, while, for example, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 13.1623246493 30% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 24.0651302605 108% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 41.998997996 88% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1906.0 1615.20841683 118% => OK
No of words: 317.0 315.596192385 100% => OK
Chars per words: 6.01261829653 5.12529762239 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21953715646 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.51104526091 2.80592935109 125% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 176.041082164 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.630914826498 0.561755894193 112% => OK
syllable_count: 608.4 506.74238477 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 26.1679430922 49.4020404114 53% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 112.117647059 106.682146367 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.6470588235 20.7667163134 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.82352941176 7.06120827912 54% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.205265491294 0.244688304435 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0619655470057 0.084324248473 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0479847669563 0.0667982634062 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.123568480433 0.151304729494 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0395494401738 0.056905535591 70% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 13.0946893788 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 27.83 50.2224549098 55% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.9 11.3001002004 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.58 12.4159519038 142% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.71 8.58950901804 125% => OK
difficult_words: 124.0 78.4519038076 158% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.