The lecture and the text evaluate the pros and cons of the team groups to get a project done. While the text author sustains that teamwork has a lot of benefits, the lecturer believes the opposite, based on the results of an analysis obtained by the company six months after a Project was assigned to a group.
First of all, the text author states that within a group the projects will combine a variety of skills from each member. However, the professor refutes it mentioning that in the development of the projects there were people who did not contribute, even though, they were praised as well as the people who made an effort, it was unfair.
Secondly, according to the passage due to the more people contributing to an assigned task, it will be developed quicker. On the contrary, the analysis showed that tasks took more time because it was difficult for the team members to quickly agree on a certain decision.
Finally, in the passage author mention that people in the teams often take more risks because if the plan fails they will not be blamed individually. Nevertheless, the lecturer conveys that in the group were influencers who persuaded the majority of the group to agree on a wrong decision without listening to the small group of detractors; when the group received the result of the decision everyone was blamed, including the people who were right.
In conclusion, the results of the company analysis refute the benefits conveyed by the passage.
Votes
Essay reference notes: This topic is refereed from another essay topic, developed by user: mmousaei
Essay Categories
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, well, while, in conclusion, as well as, first of all, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 12.0 22.412803532 54% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1221.0 1373.03311258 89% => OK
No of words: 252.0 270.72406181 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.84523809524 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98428260373 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57080080031 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 133.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.527777777778 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 378.9 419.366225166 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 28.0 21.2450331126 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 64.4120608291 49.2860985944 131% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.666666667 110.228320801 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.0 21.698381199 129% => OK
Discourse Markers: 15.4444444444 7.06452816374 219% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.248346057502 0.272083759551 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.100054591245 0.0996497079465 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0517067625492 0.0662205650399 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.122397146941 0.162205337803 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0716853826291 0.0443174109184 162% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 13.3589403974 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.52 53.8541721854 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 11.0289183223 118% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.15 12.2367328918 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.97 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 63.6247240618 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.7273730684 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.498013245 126% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.