Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
When classmates or colleagues communicate about a project in person instead of by e-mail, they will produce better work for the project.
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
These days, there is a gigantic burden on students' shoulders because of the demanding tasks and projects they encounter, which a great proportion of them require teamwork. One of the most challenging problems on which there is no consensus among educators is about beneficial ways of communication. Opinions are divided into whether it would be better for classmates to get in touch by e-mail about the projects, or discuss them in person. When it comes to me, it is my firm conviction that students' projects will be more productive in case they communicate personally. To support this, there are several reasons, two of which are going to be aptly explored in the following essay.
First and foremost, one of the important criteria in teamwork evaluation is not only its result but also its completion's speed. Although professors and managers pay painstaking attention to the findings of a project, educators and workers should not surpass some limitations, such as the project's deadline. Colleagues would squander their time by using e-mail or some other devices to provide a connection in order to complete their duties. Nevertheless, they have spent a long time on the project, yet they do not complete it. As a result, they become exhausted and less eager to finish their task. Take my experience as a compelling example of this, a couple of years ago, when I was a freshman student, my friends and I were assigned a paper which was about the effects of contaminated water on environment. As it was summer and the university was closed and, also my friends were in their cities we decided to be in touch via the internet and write the paper as soon as possible. The subject was easy to develop. However, we could not manage to write about it. This is because my friends had a very hectic daily schedule and terribly workload that were not able to fix their time with each other. In consequence, we failed to finish the task appropriately and lost our opportunity to be top students.
Another worthwhile reason to be mentioned is that the e-mail is not suitable for educational meetings. In other words, learners are not able to describe concepts and hypotheses through the e-mail accurately, which may lead to misunderstanding and misinterpretation. As a result, it may has an adverse effect on the findings of the project. For instance, in the situation as mentioned above, I did not understand the theory discussed by my friend, who made an effort to gather data and explained it incorrectly in the paper.
In summary of what has been illustrated and discussed in detail, it is a foregone conclusion that the importance of personal communicating should not be neglected. The fact that it will be more productive, is coupled with preventing misunderstanding, is the reason which strengthens my claim.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 288, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'projects'' or 'project's'?
Suggestion: projects'; project's
...t surpass some limitations, such as the projects deadline. Colleagues would squander the...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, may, nevertheless, so, then, while, for instance, in summary, such as, as a result, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 32.0 15.1003584229 212% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 9.8082437276 92% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 13.8261648746 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.0286738351 127% => OK
Pronoun: 48.0 43.0788530466 111% => OK
Preposition: 63.0 52.1666666667 121% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.0752688172 161% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2339.0 1977.66487455 118% => OK
No of words: 473.0 407.700716846 116% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94503171247 4.8611393121 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.66353547975 4.48103885553 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.00230919773 2.67179642975 112% => OK
Unique words: 253.0 212.727598566 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.53488372093 0.524837075471 102% => OK
syllable_count: 732.6 618.680645161 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 9.59856630824 115% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.51792114695 171% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.7170165625 48.9658058833 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.318181818 100.406767564 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5 20.6045352989 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.68181818182 5.45110844103 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.85842293907 181% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.208137715041 0.236089414692 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0559767953105 0.076458572812 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0466644426251 0.0737576698707 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.121133087487 0.150856017488 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0456679778203 0.0645574589148 71% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 11.7677419355 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 58.1214874552 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.1575268817 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.43 10.9000537634 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.02 8.01818996416 112% => OK
difficult_words: 130.0 86.8835125448 150% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.0537634409 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => 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: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.