Working as group member is better than individuals
The reading specifies that there are more advantages to work as a group for projects in comparison to work as individuals. Professor, however, casts doubt on this claim and provides three points to reject this claim.
First of all, the reading specifies that a group of people can work more quickly and faster in comparison to individuals since they have broad sources of knowledge. Also, they can come up with creative solutions for projects which can not be done by individuals. In contrast, the lecturer pinpoints that in a team, there are individuals which do not contribute to the project and in other words, they are free riders. Therefore, if a group comes up with innovative solutions, these individuals will get recognition which can make other members of groups unhappy.
Second, according to the reading, since the responsibilities will be spread between group members, the process will be faster. Nevertheless, the man implies that in a group project, there are many meetings between group members and it takes a lot of time for them to come up with an agreement on the project. Furthermore, proceeding with the project will take a lot of time and energy.
Third, based on the reading, individuals not only can contribute better as a group member but also their contribution can be considered significant by others because the result of a team is far-reaching with greater impact. In contrast, the professors oppose this point by saying that in every group there are people having higher influence in comparison to other members. These people can guide the group in the wrong direction and it does not matter that other members do not accept their explanation. Hence, when a project fails, all members of the group will be blamed and it is not different between influencers and other members of the group.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-11-02 | shayanhgh | 73 | view |
| 2021-06-14 | talelaldabous | 60 | view |
| 2021-05-02 | Uhernandes95 | 81 | view |
| 2020-10-19 | frank93 | 76 | view |
| 2019-08-20 | tamir052222 | 86 | view |
- TPO 32 76
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement In order to become financially responsible adults children should learn to manage their own money at a young age Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 66
- Integrated TOEFL writing-TPO 4 3
- tpo 33 76
- In the past, young people depended too much on their parents to make decisions for them; today young people are better able to make decisions about their own lives. 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 99, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...es will be spread between group members, the process will be faster. Nevertheless...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, third, in contrast, first of all, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 5.04856512141 238% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 30.3222958057 152% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1518.0 1373.03311258 111% => OK
No of words: 305.0 270.72406181 113% => OK
Chars per words: 4.97704918033 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17902490978 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80062188356 2.5805825403 109% => OK
Unique words: 150.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.491803278689 0.540411800872 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 456.3 419.366225166 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => 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: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.378283731 49.2860985944 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.769230769 110.228320801 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4615384615 21.698381199 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.4615384615 7.06452816374 148% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
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: 0.294602629455 0.272083759551 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.111513198959 0.0996497079465 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0845775069051 0.0662205650399 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.175567923138 0.162205337803 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0608162326503 0.0443174109184 137% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 13.3589403974 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 53.8541721854 105% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.9 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.04 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 63.6247240618 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.