Professional workers like doctors, nurses and teachers make a greater contribution to society and so should be paid more than sports and entertainment personalities. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Recently, the phenomenon of contribution to society and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of professional methods is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that social expenditures can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, professional workers can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that merits working skills, as well as entertainment costs, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered personality styles. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both social problems and personality issues apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of science, entertainment personalities might increase the consequences of social activities. Moreover, fundamental aspects of teaching experts could relate to this reality that the demerits of entertaining activities pertain to payment rules. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of working issues is correlated negatively with payment policies. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of social personalities.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of making a great contribution far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of professional jobs prove the significance of payment methods, but also pinpoint social sciences implications.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-19 | yasamin.gharib62 | 77 | view |
| 2019-12-19 | yasamin.gharib62 | 11 | view |
| 2019-08-12 | alireza_esml@yahoo.com | 77 | view |
| 2019-08-12 | alireza_esml@yahoo.com | 80 | view |
| 2019-07-05 | yasamin.gharib62 | 77 | view |
- Study a Particular Area of Climate Change: global warming or environmental problems 88
- Professional workers like doctors, nurses and teachers make a greater contribution to society and so should be paid more than sports and entertainment personalities. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 80
- Some people work long hours and hard to achieve success and some give importance to free time for them. Give your opinion and discuss your views. 88
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, hence, if, moreover, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 31.9359605911 97% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.75862068966 191% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1465.0 1207.87684729 121% => OK
No of words: 250.0 242.827586207 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.86 5.00649968141 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.97635364384 3.92707691288 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.39623556309 2.71678728327 125% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 139.433497537 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.656 0.580463131201 113% => OK
syllable_count: 462.6 379.143842365 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.57093596059 121% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.5024630542 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.8834238751 50.4703680194 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.083333333 104.977214359 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8333333333 20.9669160288 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.41666666667 7.25397266985 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 6.9802955665 100% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.112941655847 0.242375264174 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0376063292601 0.0925447433944 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0251160154618 0.071462118173 35% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0647378233862 0.151781067708 43% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0132914849364 0.0609392437508 22% => 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: 16.6 12.6369458128 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 25.8 53.1260098522 49% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 10.9458128079 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.71 11.5310837438 145% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.82 8.32886699507 130% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 55.0591133005 178% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.94827586207 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.3980295567 96% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.5123152709 162% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 72.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.