People in the past are more interested in improving their neighborhood (the area where they live) than now
That people have a great tendency to improve the area where they reside is an axiom. However, this preference has changed over the time greatly due to various reasons. A question, which is a matter of debate, a controversial one, is whether people in the past were more avid in improving their neighborhood than today’s people. Although it is a little hard to reach a consensus on this issue, I am, to a great extent on the belief that people in the past took part in enhancing their neighborhood more than today’s generation. The following reasons would elaborate more on the thesis.
To commence, one of the compelling reasons that justifies the thesis is that rarely do today’s people have enough time to participate in such activities. To put it in general words, fulfilling extravagant cost of subsistence requires great deal of time which prevent them from participating in improving their neighborhoods. Simply stated, since life in the past was much more simple than today, past generation had abundant time to improving their surroundings. Going into the depth, today’s hectic life prevents people from concentrating on their surrounding environment even they are eager to enhance the quality of the area in which they reside. Needless to say that, the fact that people in the past should not have worked for long hours in a day provides them the chance to improve their neighborhoods. To shed more light on the issue, according to the result of the study posted in Time Magazine, findings of the ancient towns indicates that people in the past was more concerned about the outside design of their house than today’s people.
Alongside with the first reason elaborated above, the fundamental paradigm shift in the people’s interest in another point which requires meticulous attention. To clarify, the concerns and interests of the people have been altered over the periods of time. Broadly speaking, each time period has its own attractions; that being so, it is not farfetched that people’s interest has shifted over the time. To delineate, not having access to today’s technologies such as the Internet, people in the past gravitated toward other activities to have fun. On the contrary, as the age of information explosion has initiated, today’s people are detached from their surrounding since they expend most of their time with the high technologies. It is all transparent that, intrigued by assorted priorities of the specific time, people opt for the one in which they are more interested. However, what I mentioned above might not be overgeneralized to all contexts. Today, there are some people with artistic spirit which promotes them to make their surrounding beautiful. Nevertheless, they are more of an exception rather than a general rule.
Drawing upon the reasons, although there are always some exceptions which are excluded from the general rule, I do agree that people in the past were more enthusiastic to improve their neighborhoods. To recapitulate the reasons, not only did they have more free time to participate in these activities, but also improving their surrounding was among their interests unlike today.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, nevertheless, so, thus, broadly speaking, in general, such as, on the contrary, to a great extent
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 15.1003584229 146% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 9.8082437276 31% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 13.8261648746 14% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 19.0 11.0286738351 172% => OK
Pronoun: 45.0 43.0788530466 104% => OK
Preposition: 91.0 52.1666666667 174% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.0752688172 136% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2682.0 1977.66487455 136% => OK
No of words: 514.0 407.700716846 126% => OK
Chars per words: 5.21789883268 4.8611393121 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.76146701107 4.48103885553 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.98079364201 2.67179642975 112% => OK
Unique words: 250.0 212.727598566 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.486381322957 0.524837075471 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 832.5 618.680645161 135% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 9.59856630824 83% => OK
Article: 6.0 3.08781362007 194% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 12.0 4.94265232975 243% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.1344086022 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.7338869324 48.9658058833 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.909090909 100.406767564 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.3636363636 20.6045352989 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.81818181818 5.45110844103 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 11.8709677419 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.85842293907 26% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.40077599061 0.236089414692 170% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.129585730454 0.076458572812 169% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0798634288544 0.0737576698707 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.288192709869 0.150856017488 191% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0547149536253 0.0645574589148 85% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 11.7677419355 126% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 58.1214874552 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.1575268817 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 10.9000537634 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.68 8.01818996416 108% => OK
difficult_words: 127.0 86.8835125448 146% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.002688172 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.0537634409 111% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.