Today, many employers are looking for various sources of information to understand job applicants better. Which is the best way for the employers to better know the situation of a job applicant? Contacting previous employers; checking the job applicant's profile on the social platform; one month's probation.
Without a doubt, every corporation has an exclusive method to choose their employee by which they can find a suitable person for a particular position. From my perspective, one month's probation is a good way to select an employee. There are numerous reasons to support my opinion, among which two stand out.
First and foremost, with one month working in a firm, managers can assess every aspect of a worker and test his ability to see if they are fit for this job or not. Clearly, employee performance in the workplace is a vital factor for managers to hire a worker. Therefore, when employees work for a company for one month, it provides a golden opportunity for the boss to test some of their abilities such as problem-solving, critical thinking, creative thinking, ability to work with unique software, to name but a few. My personal example in my first job experience would drive this notion home. When sending my resume to a renowned company, I was selected for a position, but I must work temporarily for a month there. At first, I was disappointed, but while I started working there, I figured out it was a good opportunity for both the company and me to know our situation. In this way, they entrusted lots of complex projects to assess my ability to fulfill the task. Moreover, they provided some strict conditions to evaluate my mental health, like how I can tolerate difficult projects and how I can control my stress. On the other hand, I learn some new skills which are really essential for working there. As a result, had I not worked there for one month's probation, they would not figure my ability and do not hire me.
Second, neither previous employers nor applicants' profiles can provide true information about the worker. To be more specific, previous employers may give misleading or biased information about the employee because they may have a good friendship with them, or they have conflict. Hence, managers cannot get useful information about the workers. In addition, people may say some things about themselves which are not completely based on the truth. For instance, they may claim that they have some special ability such as working with specific software, but they are not experts in working with this software in the real world. Consequently, by one months' probation, the employers can assess all the abilities of employees truly.
To sum up, considering the reasons and the examples mentioned above, I believe that it is a better way for the employer to choose an employee by one month working with them. This is because not only do they assess all their ability easily and test them in various conditions, but they can also obtain trustworthy information about them.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-11-17 | ehsanghoflsaz | 70 | view |
- Today many employers are looking for various sources of information to understand job applicants better Which is the best way for the employers to better know the situation of a job applicant Contacting previous employers checking the job applicant s prof 70
- if you are required to give feedback about your classmates colleagues work or performance would you like to give positive comments or negative comments first 66
- if you are required to give feedback about your classmates colleagues work or performance would you like to give positive comments or negative comments first 66
- if you are required to give feedback about your classmates colleagues work or performance would you like to give positive comments or negative comments first 66
- tpo 70 3
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, hence, if, may, moreover, really, second, so, therefore, while, for instance, in addition, such as, as a result, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 15.1003584229 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 9.8082437276 153% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 13.8261648746 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.0286738351 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 53.0 43.0788530466 123% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 54.0 52.1666666667 104% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.0752688172 186% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2251.0 1977.66487455 114% => OK
No of words: 462.0 407.700716846 113% => OK
Chars per words: 4.87229437229 4.8611393121 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.63618218583 4.48103885553 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71204174799 2.67179642975 102% => OK
Unique words: 232.0 212.727598566 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.502164502165 0.524837075471 96% => OK
syllable_count: 702.0 618.680645161 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 9.59856630824 125% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.86738351254 268% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 14.0 4.94265232975 283% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.5735222044 48.9658058833 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.19047619 100.406767564 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 20.6045352989 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.2380952381 5.45110844103 151% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 11.8709677419 118% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.171275127137 0.236089414692 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0560234215199 0.076458572812 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0429654181556 0.0737576698707 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.102521662394 0.150856017488 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0280277308306 0.0645574589148 43% => 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: 12.5 11.7677419355 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 58.1214874552 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.1575268817 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.97 10.9000537634 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.15 8.01818996416 102% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 86.8835125448 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.002688172 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => 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: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.