It is indeed true that progression in technology, such as the internet, individuals have an ample of options available in every field. I partially agree with the statement as undoubtedly every sector gives us opportunity to choose according to our preference; however, people who are below the poverty line cannot even afford the basic necessities.
To commence with, there are a plethora of options available in education. Due to the internet, students can search for any course and get insight knowledge about different courses irrespective of the location because there are no geographical barriers to obtain education. For instance, since the globalisation, almost 30 billion students have graduated from the foreign countries including Canada, Australia, Germany, UK, US and so on. In addition, for commuting, people have a number of transportation options such as air, land and water. As per convenience and affordability, individuals can opt for any mode of transport. Hence, the choices are not only available in a particular sector but in every field.
Conversely, although the advancement has reached a level where we have availability of numerous choices, people living in underdeveloped nations cannot even think of these options. This is because they are devoid of food, shelter and even clean water. To substantiate, according to a report published by WHO, 30% of citizens, in emerging countries, do not get clean water to drink and 35% people sleep with hunger on a daily basis. Therefore, available options are sheer wastage for underprivileged people.
In conclusion, it is irrefutable that a wide range of choices are available in today' time; however, opting for them is a herculean task for some economically challenged countries.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 232, Rule ID: AFFORD_VBG[1]
Message: This verb is used with infinitive: 'to accord'.
Suggestion: to accord
...y sector gives us opportunity to choose according to our preference; however, people who ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 331, Rule ID: BASIC_FUNDAMENTALS[1]
Message: Use simply 'necessities'.
Suggestion: necessities
...the poverty line cannot even afford the basic necessities. To commence with, there are a pleth...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 305, Rule ID: IN_WHO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'whom'?
Suggestion: Whom
...ate, according to a report published by WHO, 30% of citizens, in emerging countries...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, hence, however, if, so, therefore, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 41.998997996 90% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1486.0 1615.20841683 92% => OK
No of words: 275.0 315.596192385 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.40363636364 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07223819929 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.15927808471 2.80592935109 113% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 176.041082164 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.621818181818 0.561755894193 111% => OK
syllable_count: 480.6 506.74238477 95% => 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
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => 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: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.6773100954 49.4020404114 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.307692308 106.682146367 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.1538461538 20.7667163134 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.76923076923 7.06120827912 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.121791718115 0.244688304435 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0390827406333 0.084324248473 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0310094463945 0.0667982634062 46% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0724170772455 0.151304729494 48% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0201258787779 0.056905535591 35% => 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: 14.6 13.0946893788 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.04 12.4159519038 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.27 8.58950901804 108% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 78.4519038076 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.