More and more young people from wealthy countries are spending a short time in communitites in poorer countries doing un paid work such as teaching and building houses. Why ? Who benefits more from this, the community or these young people?
It is true that the number of adults in affluent nations who choose to do unpaid jobs in underdeveloped nations has been increasing in many recent years. While there are numerous reasons for this trend, both those youngsters and the host countries could gain enormous benefits from this temporary unpaid work.
One possible reason for doing such no salary work may be because those youngsters want to compensate partially for their forefathers in war due to the fatally irreversible outcomes they had done previously. In Vietnam, for example, each years hundreds of American adult volunteers come to teach or build houses for disabled families who had exposed to agent orange, a powerful mixture of chemical defoliants used by U.S. military forces during the Vietnam War to eliminate forest, as a small compensation. Another probable motivation for those could be due to the fact that they feel some degree of responsibility towards international solidarity. If, for instance, they take part in these voluntary work, then the international relations could be consolidate and the economic gap between the rich and the poor could be eradicated with the passing of time.
As a consequence, thanks to these voluntary work, those adults could stand themself as well as the impoverished nations in good stead. With their efforts as teachers or labourer in construction areas, many schools for the disabled could be erected, illiteracy rate, therefore, would be declined and be no longer a headache for state governments in low-income countries like Africa. Those young volunteers are enthusiastic, devoted, and well-educated, meaning that they could impart their useful knowledge to the underprivileged regions, where state-of-the-art teachnologies are still isolated. In terms of the adults taking part in these meaningful activities, they could gain hands-on experiences from numerous difficulties they have to encounter in poor nations, where the lack of excellent amenities and modern infrastructure is inevitable. Consequently, the more philanthropic actions they are involved in, the more advantages they and the host countries could receive.
In conclusion, the reasons why young generations from high-income countries tend to spend short time in voluntary contribution in poor nations are evident and this trend could benefit both the poor and those adults to some extent.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017-02-10 | kingnight153 | 84 | view |
| 2017-02-10 | kingnight153 | 84 | view |
- In recent years tourists have paid attention to preserving both the culture and environment of the places they visit However some people think that it is impossible to be a responsible tourist To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion 49
- Most large companies nowadays operate multi-nationally. To what extent do multinational companies have responsibility toward local communities in which they operate. 84
- The charts show the sources of the electricity produced in 4 countries between 2003 and 2008 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 68
- The charts show the Australian school leavers did immediately after leaving secondary school Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 83
- The charts below show the main methods of transportation for people travelling to one university for work or study in 2004 and 2009 88
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, if, may, so, still, then, therefore, thus, well, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion, as well as, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 24.0651302605 112% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 41.998997996 110% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2017.0 1615.20841683 125% => OK
No of words: 367.0 315.596192385 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.49591280654 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37689890912 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07988702772 2.80592935109 110% => OK
Unique words: 214.0 176.041082164 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.58310626703 0.561755894193 104% => OK
syllable_count: 621.0 506.74238477 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Interrogative: 2.0 0.384769539078 520% => Less interrogative sentences wanted.
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 30.0 20.2975951904 148% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 51.8175217041 49.4020404114 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 168.083333333 106.682146367 158% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.5833333333 20.7667163134 147% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.5833333333 7.06120827912 164% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.173653973775 0.244688304435 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0682168347084 0.084324248473 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0620165096927 0.0667982634062 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125239440954 0.151304729494 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0518184696306 0.056905535591 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.8 13.0946893788 151% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.57 50.2224549098 65% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.2 11.3001002004 143% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.21 12.4159519038 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.77 8.58950901804 114% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 78.4519038076 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.78957915832 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 10.1190380762 138% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.