tpo
The reading and lecture is about an organization who is working as a group of people in a team. The reading states that there are several advantages when a group of people works on a new project. The lecture cast doubt on the reading. He is of the opinion that when the project is revised after 6 months he found that there were many flaws.
Firstly, the reading states that single individual doesn't have skills and knowledge but a group can provide their expertise and knowledge within the project. It is mentioned that group can respond quickly to the task assigned and can come with a creative solution to the problems and issues. The lecture argues with the statement given in the reading. He says that there were many free-riders within the group. All the individual didn't contribute well in the project. Furthermore, he says that, when the project was a success everyone was rewarded. But the actual person who worked hard on the project was not named.
Secondly, the author contends that a group can make a risky decision than a single individual. The article states that group spread responsibility for a decision and no single individual will be held responsible if the decision turns wrong. The lecture, however, rebuts this statement by asserting that they reach consequences. He elaborates on this by mentioning that there were many long meeting and long discussions. The team used to make them as influencers. An influencer is a person who decides that the idea should be dropped or kept.
Lastly, the writer states that there was a voice in making a decision. The reader establishes that indivival<span class="hiddenSpellError" pre="that "></span> member has a better chance to "shine" if his ideas are recognized and established as a team. The lecture, on the other hand, posits that project failure would be a greater impact for the group. He puts forth the idea that if the project fails the blame would come to all the members of the group.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 197, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...group of people works on a new project. The lecture cast doubt on the reading. He i...
^^^
Line 3, column 52, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...e reading states that single individual doesnt have skills and knowledge but a group c...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 431, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...rs within the group. All the individual didnt contribute well in the project. Further...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 75, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...re was a voice in making a decision. The reader establishes that indivival ^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, lastly, second, secondly, so, well, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 15.1003584229 119% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 9.8082437276 82% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 13.8261648746 80% => OK
Relative clauses : 23.0 11.0286738351 209% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 30.0 43.0788530466 70% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 52.1666666667 50% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 4.0 8.0752688172 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1668.0 1977.66487455 84% => OK
No of words: 334.0 407.700716846 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.99401197605 4.8611393121 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27500489853 4.48103885553 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.2190627658 2.67179642975 120% => OK
Unique words: 167.0 212.727598566 79% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.524837075471 95% => OK
syllable_count: 501.3 618.680645161 81% => 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: 13.0 3.08781362007 421% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.94265232975 20% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 20.1344086022 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.0350753245 48.9658058833 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 79.4285714286 100.406767564 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.9047619048 20.6045352989 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.7619047619 5.45110844103 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.5376344086 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 11.8709677419 51% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.85842293907 181% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.88709677419 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.236089414692 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.076458572812 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0737576698707 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.150856017488 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0645574589148 0% => 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: 10.0 11.7677419355 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 64.71 58.1214874552 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.0 10.1575268817 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.37 10.9000537634 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.69 8.01818996416 96% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 86.8835125448 81% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.002688172 80% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.0537634409 80% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 10.247311828 78% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
We are expecting: No. of Words: 350 while No. of Different Words: 200
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.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.