There have existed endless discussions on the topic of working hours. It is argued that working hours spread over three days a week with long hours is more preferable than jobs that spread over five days a week with shorter hours. Personally, I disagree with this argument.
On one hand, personal fulfillment draw much of my attention. It is apparent that spending five out of seven days a week at a job implies shorter gaps between workdays. As a consequence, workers are less likely to disrupt their “flow” of work, which means they ought to remain sharp when starting their day of work. Accordingly, their productiveness is increased, resulting in higher quality of work. This, in turn, enhances other aspects of their worklife, such as respect from colleagues or chances of getting promoted or earning a raise, as well as giving workers the satisfaction of producing high quality work. More notably, spending shorter hours per work day leaves more free time everyday for workers to invest elsewhere. Workers have the opportunity to use this free time for meaningful and important activities that benefits their life quality. For example, workers are given a golden chance to spend this golden time with their family, to have fun with their children or to have a homely TV night together. Such activities bonds the family together, whilst creating beautiful memories that lasts a lifetime and brings much happiness. By and large, working at a job five days a week with shorter hours should be more fulfilling for workers.
On the other hand, some might say that working many days a week would quickly drain out workers’ energy and leave them tired when returning from work. Subsequently, they would become irritated, angry, and unhappy. However, this is not necessarily the case. In fact, while the number of days increases the total amount of hours do not change. The hours are instead split over smaller periods, meaning that workers are allowed to rest sooner. Resting sooner prevents workers from overworking and keeps them energetic throughout the day. Therefore, they avoid fatigue, both physically and mentally, while retaining some energy to spend on other leisure and fulfilling activities that brings them joy and happiness. With no doubt, the claim that a five days a week job brings misery to workers is intrinsically wrong.
To sum up, maintaining the flow of work, having free time everyday and shorter working periods are convincing reasons for my argument that a job consisting of five days a week with shorter hours is more beneficial to workers’ happiness.
- TPO-48 - Independent Writing Task Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Because modern life is very complex, it is essential for young people to have the ability to plan and organize. 73
- TPO-40 - Integrated Writing Task 78
- TPO 41 - integrated writing 88
- TPO 27 integrated writing Little ice age 80
- TPO 27 integrated writing Little ice age 75
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 688, Rule ID: EVERYDAY_EVERY_DAY[3]
Message: 'Everyday' is an adjective. Did you mean 'every day'?
Suggestion: every day
...ours per work day leaves more free time everyday for workers to invest elsewhere. Worker...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1034, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[1]
Message: You should probably use 'bond'.
Suggestion: bond
...mely TV night together. Such activities bonds the family together, whilst creating be...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 59, Rule ID: EVERYDAY_EVERY_DAY[3]
Message: 'Everyday' is an adjective. Did you mean 'every day'?
Suggestion: every day
...ning the flow of work, having free time everyday and shorter working periods are convinc...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, however, if, so, therefore, well, while, for example, in fact, no doubt, such as, as well as, by and large, 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: 5.0 9.8082437276 51% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 13.8261648746 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.0286738351 118% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 43.0788530466 74% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 52.1666666667 105% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.0752688172 74% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2171.0 1977.66487455 110% => OK
No of words: 426.0 407.700716846 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09624413146 4.8611393121 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54310108192 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62673538988 2.67179642975 98% => OK
Unique words: 222.0 212.727598566 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.521126760563 0.524837075471 99% => OK
syllable_count: 643.5 618.680645161 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.94265232975 162% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.0442402511 48.9658058833 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.6818181818 100.406767564 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3636363636 20.6045352989 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.77272727273 5.45110844103 124% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.88709677419 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.359676797257 0.236089414692 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.109099833685 0.076458572812 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.109079096957 0.0737576698707 148% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.271412556962 0.150856017488 180% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0785140045202 0.0645574589148 122% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 11.7677419355 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 58.1214874552 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.1575268817 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.3 10.9000537634 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.14 8.01818996416 102% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 86.8835125448 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.002688172 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.247311828 98% => 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: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.