There is a common agreement on the fact that no person is complete. All of us carry some deficiencies which can affect us in a bad way. This would be even more problematic when people have to work in groups, although some features are more significant in order to act properly in groups. One of them is an openness to criticism, otherwise, people cannot be adjusted to the group, by having dysfunctional internal relationships with other members, also missing the opportunity for progress and learning. Additional explanations for each point will be given in the following paragraphs.
First of all, one critical key to success is having constructive relationships with other people. When one works in a group, she should always expect some inconveniences. As we all have unique thoughts, beliefs, and attitudes, as well as some faults in our performance, we could definitely be exposed to criticism. Ever since, if one is not accepting that differences or flaws, she starts to make it a personal deal and, as a result, her relationships will be affected badly. In this condition that person might end up to lose her social support, also it would be hard to do the job as it is supposed to be done. Sometimes, in the worst scenario, one can get totally ignored. In a nutshell, being patient about criticism is a cost that should pay in order to prevent losing our network.
Besides, when we got a complaint or condemn about our personality or our outcomes in a group, there is still the possibility that people are right about us and their opinion is based on real evidence. However, if we don’t accept that criticism we just simply take away our chance to learn something and be a better person. Considering one of my colleagues as an example, she used to think about herself in the way that no one is as perfect as she is in the team, but it was just in her mind. After a while, people started to mention her errors to help her, since she was not open to criticism she didn't change, even a little bit, eventually, she got fired and lost everything which was important for her.
To conclude, it could be said that working as a group member needs people to be flexible about other’s idea. Therefore, we should be ready to hear criticism and tolerate them, because only this way we can build up effective connections and facilitate our self-growth, if not, we would be considered an inefficient person in a group.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 123, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a bad way" with adverb for "bad"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...y some deficiencies which can affect us in a bad way. This would be even more problematic wh...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...n order to prevent losing our network. Besides, when we got a complaint or cond...
^^^
Line 5, column 603, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...since she was not open to criticism she didnt change, even a little bit, eventually, ...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 624, Rule ID: LITTLE_BIT[1]
Message: Reduce redundancy by using 'little' or 'bit'.
Suggestion: little; bit
...n to criticism she didnt change, even a little bit, eventually, she got fired and lost eve...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, however, if, so, still, therefore, well, while, as a result, as well as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 29.0 15.1003584229 192% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 9.8082437276 153% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 13.8261648746 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.0286738351 118% => OK
Pronoun: 51.0 43.0788530466 118% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 52.1666666667 105% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.0752688172 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2007.0 1977.66487455 101% => OK
No of words: 425.0 407.700716846 104% => OK
Chars per words: 4.72235294118 4.8611393121 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54043259262 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84841970392 2.67179642975 107% => OK
Unique words: 232.0 212.727598566 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.545882352941 0.524837075471 104% => OK
syllable_count: 631.8 618.680645161 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 9.59856630824 104% => OK
Article: 0.0 3.08781362007 0% => OK
Subordination: 12.0 3.51792114695 341% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.94265232975 162% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6003584229 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.1344086022 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.8238395489 48.9658058833 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.5 100.406767564 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6111111111 20.6045352989 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.22222222222 5.45110844103 114% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.5376344086 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 11.8709677419 59% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 3.85842293907 233% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.176519809239 0.236089414692 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.058607853052 0.076458572812 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0478014711339 0.0737576698707 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.116858518751 0.150856017488 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0305593181237 0.0645574589148 47% => 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: 12.6 11.7677419355 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 58.1214874552 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.1575268817 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.39 10.9000537634 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.31 8.01818996416 104% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 86.8835125448 109% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.002688172 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.0537634409 111% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 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.