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.
The epoch-making innovation of the internet has changed our lives' shape, and has provided different communication methods for humankind. Some people hold a positive perspective toward the use of the internet in their educations and careers, while others believe that it is better to use the traditional ways for their communications instead of the internet. I subscribe to these group and I strongly think that to work more productive on a project, it is better to meet in person rather than using e-mail.
To begin with, despite any benefits that the internet and specifically e-mail have brought about, communicating by e-mail could be misleading and confusing. In fact, face to face, discussing about a part of work will prompt lucrative outcomes. Arguments through the e-mail or virtual platforms somewhat cause many misperceptions, and in some way may be offensive as well. My personal experience is a persuasive example of what I mean. Last month, I had a communal project with my colleagues, and due to the COVID-19 pandemic we all have to work remotely. In the middle of the project, I confronted to a problem which I cannot cope with it lonely. I used the internet and sent an e-mail to one of my colleagues explaining about my issue, but the received e-mail surprised me. She didn't understand my point of view and rejected all of my proposal parts of the project. I became desperate and without any hope, continued my efforts to come up with a novel idea. However, after two days, she sent me another e-mail and apologized me for how she wrote that e-mail. She asserted that through the virtual contact, it is possible to have misunderstanding. This example demonstrates how it important to talk and argue about an aspect of project in person.
What's more, to avoid squandering time and energy, it is practical to meet our associations in person. By e-mail, it could waste of time describing a fact without any prospective efficiency. As an illustration, consider the example mentioned previously, I have wasted my time for two days working on unnecessary subject, which would be more profitable if we could talk about my problem face to face.
To put it in a nutshell, I firmly believe that communicating with coworkers or classmates in real world is more useful than through virtual media. Using an e-mail could cause misunderstanding and wasting of time and effort, while in person it is easier to dispute and concur.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 779, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...t the received e-mail surprised me. She didnt understand my point of view and rejecte...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: What's
... about an aspect of project in person. Whats more, to avoid squandering time and ene...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, may, so, well, while, i mean, in fact, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 15.1003584229 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 9.8082437276 82% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 13.8261648746 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.0286738351 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 49.0 43.0788530466 114% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 52.1666666667 123% => OK
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: 2026.0 1977.66487455 102% => OK
No of words: 410.0 407.700716846 101% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94146341463 4.8611393121 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49982852243 4.48103885553 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99491538177 2.67179642975 112% => OK
Unique words: 218.0 212.727598566 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.531707317073 0.524837075471 101% => OK
syllable_count: 646.2 618.680645161 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 16.0 9.59856630824 167% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 8.0 4.94265232975 162% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.1344086022 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.5770135306 48.9658058833 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.3 100.406767564 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5 20.6045352989 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.5 5.45110844103 64% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 11.8709677419 51% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 3.85842293907 285% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.265727481086 0.236089414692 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.078328728856 0.076458572812 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0466731916019 0.0737576698707 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.152094611024 0.150856017488 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.058159125084 0.0645574589148 90% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 11.7677419355 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 58.1214874552 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.1575268817 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.37 10.9000537634 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.56 8.01818996416 107% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 86.8835125448 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.002688172 145% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.0537634409 99% => 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: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.