Recently, growing xenophobia in the Western countries has sparked an ongoing controversy, which inevitably leads to a moot question, "what steps can be taken to tackle this challenge?" Whereas it is a widely held view that fear towards foreigners is profoundly harmful, I will discuss controversial aspects of that throughout this essay.
From the social standpoint, religious developments are bound up inextricably with nationalist policies, which indicates they lead to social discrimination. As a well-known example, a longitudinal study conducted by eminent scientists in 2014 demonstrates the relationship between globalization and social crisis as well as an exponential increase in immigration. Their academic criticism was impressive. Consequently, my empirical evidence presented thus far support the contention that the likelihood of occurring discrimination against immigrants is correlated positively with not only irreversible changes but also adverse outcomes.
Within the realm of political science, without the slightest doubt, efficient radicalism systems attribute to alternative hypotheses, in that it would come down to governmental interventions and Racial discrimination. A salient example of such attribution is non-governmental organizations, which is a cause for concern since it was mistaken to take dramatic improvements for granted. Had there been a paradigm shift earlier, scholars might have had the opportunity to pinpoint legislation problems. Likewise, hardly had they confine their attention to criticism, treason, and even multiculturalism. Hence, it is reasonable to infer the pivotal role of systematic changes.
To conclude, as for myself, as the saying goes “all’s well that ends well,” after analyzing what elaborated above, I firmly believe that government must remain accountable for hostility in many other immigrant-receiving nations. However, we perceive that with the benefit of hindsight, the more we research, the further we discover. Meanwhile, as a feasible solution, the local authorities are recommended to enforce strict legislation, and individuals are hoped to heighten their intellect.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 84, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , &apos
...oes 'all's well that ends well,' after analyzing what elaborated above,...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, hence, however, if, likewise, so, thus, well, whereas, while, as for, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.5418719212 123% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 6.10837438424 82% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 20.9802955665 119% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 31.9359605911 119% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 5.75862068966 260% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1867.0 1207.87684729 155% => OK
No of words: 305.0 242.827586207 126% => OK
Chars per words: 6.12131147541 5.00649968141 122% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17902490978 3.92707691288 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.63148464557 2.71678728327 134% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 139.433497537 157% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.718032786885 0.580463131201 124% => OK
syllable_count: 575.1 379.143842365 152% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.57093596059 121% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.6157635468 130% => OK
Article: 5.0 1.56157635468 320% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.65517241379 164% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 12.6551724138 103% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.5024630542 112% => OK
Sentence length SD: 79.9861674432 50.4703680194 158% => OK
Chars per sentence: 143.615384615 104.977214359 137% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4615384615 20.9669160288 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.07692307692 7.25397266985 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 6.9802955665 100% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 2.75862068966 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 2.91625615764 69% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0690721195154 0.242375264174 28% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0152373377833 0.0925447433944 16% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0325630334216 0.071462118173 46% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.041695205358 0.151781067708 27% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0475325145628 0.0609392437508 78% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.1 12.6369458128 151% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 22.75 53.1260098522 43% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 10.9458128079 144% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 18.51 11.5310837438 161% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.71 8.32886699507 141% => OK
difficult_words: 134.0 55.0591133005 243% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 22.0 9.94827586207 221% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.3980295567 108% => OK
text_standard: 19.0 10.5123152709 181% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 11.1111111111 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 10.0 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.