Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
Getting a job in which you work with other people is better than getting a job in which you work alone.
Decision on jobs has been an appealing topic in our modern society. It is now widely argued that colaborating with several peers are more excellent than individually dueling with works. In my personal viewpoint, I strongly approve of this argument.
In the first place, what I put in my priority is work efficiency. It cannot be denied that working in a group means that there are always peers who are, with you, working in a mission. As members in the same group, they are likely to understand your weaknesses, and also your obstacles to complete your part. Therefore, they might provide you with assistances to alleviate your difficulties. This enables all members in the team to fulfill their work with the best outcome. More importantly, in a group, collegues are bound to frequently exchange their ideas with others. Each of them, inevitably, has its own pros and cons. Hence, availability of numerous different ideas creates chances for any group to come up with perfect resolutions for their problems. The better ideas, as well as resolutions they conceive, the better results they acquire.
On the other hand, some people may insist that working with several colleagues instead of self-dealing with missions, people may be rewarded and respected less in case the team comes up with exceptional results. As a result, it is problematic for them to be stand out and promote in their company. However, it is not necessarily the case. Admittedly, the outcome, as together achieved, belongs to all members in such group. Consequently, once their outcome is excellent, they are all underscored by others. Furthermore, working in a group is indeed a significant opportunity for any worker to prove his potential, for he not only shows his professional skills but also proves how well he leads his team or colaborates with his partners. Accordingly, he is strongly likely to be appreciated by his leaders as well as respected by his colleagues. This means that he stands the golden chance to promote in his career. By and large, the opinions that colaborating in works prevents workers from striving in company may end in collapse.
In conclusion, these mentioned ideas are convincing evidences for my choice. It is highly recommended that workers worldwide should put my writing in careful consideration to make appropriate decisions.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 145, Rule ID: WHO_NOUN[1]
Message: A noun should not follow "who". Try changing to a verb or maybe to 'who is a are'.
Suggestion: who is a are
...group means that there are always peers who are, with you, working in a mission. As mem...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 649, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'numerous'.
Suggestion: numerous
...n pros and cons. Hence, availability of numerous different ideas creates chances for any group to ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, but, consequently, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, may, so, therefore, well, as to, in conclusion, as a result, as well as, by and large, in the first place, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 15.1003584229 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 9.8082437276 61% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 13.8261648746 51% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.0286738351 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 53.0 43.0788530466 123% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 57.0 52.1666666667 109% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 8.0752688172 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1963.0 1977.66487455 99% => OK
No of words: 383.0 407.700716846 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.12532637076 4.8611393121 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.42384287591 4.48103885553 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93754916552 2.67179642975 110% => OK
Unique words: 216.0 212.727598566 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.563968668407 0.524837075471 107% => OK
syllable_count: 603.9 618.680645161 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 9.59856630824 135% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.994623655914 101% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.6003584229 112% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.1344086022 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 44.2136503911 48.9658058833 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 85.347826087 100.406767564 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.652173913 20.6045352989 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.78260869565 5.45110844103 161% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 11.8709677419 118% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => 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: 0.194916251514 0.236089414692 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0488050667526 0.076458572812 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0630796793651 0.0737576698707 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0992990700493 0.150856017488 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0664882461466 0.0645574589148 103% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 11.7677419355 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 58.1214874552 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.1575268817 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 10.9000537634 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.59 8.01818996416 107% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 86.8835125448 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.002688172 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.0537634409 84% => 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.